Videos: The First 2012 Presidential Debate From Denver

[webfact]

PART 1: The First 2012 Presidential Debate from Denver

[webfact]

PART 2: The First 2012 Presidential Debate from Denver

[csrprof]

From my alma mater, the University of Denver!

[MILT]

I wouldn't vote for either of these knuckleheads! My man is republican Ron Paul but as always the "power's to be" would never allow the federal reserve to be audited or eliminated. After you hear what these 2 experts on how to save America say, check out Ron Paul on youtube.

One of the last honest, transparent and true american politician around.

[baboon]

Who are you and what have you done with Barack Obama? The guy on the video has to be an imposter.

[koheesti]

Who are you and what have you done with Barack Obama? The guy on the video has to be an imposter.

No, that was the real Barack Obama. That's what he is really like when he isn't reading from a teleprompter. People probably forget but during the 2008 campaign Obama was speaking at an event and came across like an idiot when he started to ramble on. After that, he would only be allowed to speak from a teleprompter. On top of that, he can't stand to be challenged. The media, in their attempts to give him the easiest ride imaginable, never gave him tough questions so when debate time came around, he was lost.

[koheesti]

This is hilarious - Euronews actually found a room full of Americans who stayed up to watch the debate who think Obama clearly won. <deleted>? Oh, yeah, they were in Washington DC which gave Obama maybe over 95% in 2008.

http://www.euronews.com/2012/10/04/reaction-to-the-denver-debate/

[baboon]

This is hilarious - Euronews actually found a room full of Americans who stayed up to watch the debate who think Obama clearly won. <deleted>? Oh, yeah, they were in Washington DC which gave Obama maybe over 95% in 2008.

http://www.euronews....-denver-debate/

God knows what they were watching if they thought Cbama won.

[BigRick]

A lively debate for sure. The Liberal media is already counting Romney out but this debate showed that "Let the man speak and maybe the public should decide who will be the next president" Lets face it Obama has way to many problems to be a shoe in for reelection. The debate should be about how both parties are failing the majority of Americans. Obama is only part of the blame the Senate has not been doing its job also. I think the VP debate will be a Turkey shoot for the GOP Biden will say something totally off key and stupid. I also cant wait for all the Meme's from this debate the faces were hilarious. The whole specrum Sullen Obama, Inquisitive Romney, Incredulous Obama, Hulk smash Romney on and on. The moderator did a piss poor job I am surprised this is his 14th debate. This looks to be a good election someones going to be pissed you can already tell.

Edited October 4, 2012 by BigRick

[maidu]

Not surprisingly, the 'fact checkers' have been busy during, and immediatly after the 1st debate.

Below is an excerpt from NPR (National Public Radio) in the US:

— In listing his objections to the Affordable Care Act, Romney said it "puts in place an unelected board that's going to tell people, ultimately, what kind of treatments they can have. I don't like that idea."

But the Times and National Journal have reported that the board in question wouldn't make treatment decisions, a point Obama made during the debate. National Journal calledRomney's characterization of what this board would do "one of the biggest whoppers of the night." PolitiFact gave Romney's claim a "mostly false" rating.

— As for Obama's claim that under his watch the economy has created 5 million jobs in the past 30 months, NPR's John Ydstie says that's true.

[chiangmaikelly]

Not surprisingly, the 'fact checkers' have been busy during, and immediatly after the 1st debate.

Below is an excerpt from NPR (National Public Radio) in the US:

— In listing his objections to the Affordable Care Act, Romney said it "puts in place an unelected board that's going to tell people, ultimately, what kind of treatments they can have. I don't like that idea."

But the Times and National Journal have reported that the board in question wouldn't make treatment decisions, a point Obama made during the debate. National Journal calledRomney's characterization of what this board would do "one of the biggest whoppers of the night." PolitiFact gave Romney's claim a "mostly false" rating.

— As for Obama's claim that under his watch the economy has created 5 million jobs in the past 30 months, NPR's John Ydstie says that's true.

OBAMA: It's important "that we take some of the money that we're saving as we wind down two wars to rebuild America."

THE FACTS: This oft-repeated claim is based on a fiscal fiction. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were paid for mostly with borrowed money, so stopping them doesn't create a new pool of available cash that can be used for something else, like rebuilding America. It just slows down the government's borrowing.

[Ulysses G.]

— As for Obama's claim that under his watch the economy has created 5 million jobs in the past 30 months, NPR's John Ydstie says that's true.

He also says that it "ignores an inconvenient truth (for the president), that about the same number of jobs were lost during Obama's first year in office". The fact-checkers found fault with both candidates.

[koheesti]

Not surprisingly, the 'fact checkers' have been busy during, and immediatly after the 1st debate.

Below is an excerpt from NPR (National Public Radio) in the US:

— In listing his objections to the Affordable Care Act, Romney said it "puts in place an unelected board that's going to tell people, ultimately, what kind of treatments they can have. I don't like that idea."

But the Times and National Journal have reported that the board in question wouldn't make treatment decisions, a point Obama made during the debate. National Journal calledRomney's characterization of what this board would do "one of the biggest whoppers of the night." PolitiFact gave Romney's claim a "mostly false" rating.

— As for Obama's claim that under his watch the economy has created 5 million jobs in the past 30 months, NPR's John Ydstie says that's true.

OBAMA: It's important "that we take some of the money that we're saving as we wind down two wars to rebuild America."

THE FACTS: This oft-repeated claim is based on a fiscal fiction. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were paid for mostly with borrowed money, so stopping them doesn't create a new pool of available cash that can be used for something else, like rebuilding America. It just slows down the government's borrowing.

Obama knew this, he even mentioned it later on...

PRESIDENT OBAMA: When I walked in the Oval Office, I had more than a trillion dollar deficit greeting me, and we know where it came from. Two wars that were paid for on a credit card.

[koheesti]

Not surprisingly, the 'fact checkers' have been busy during, and immediatly after the 1st debate.

Below is an excerpt from NPR (National Public Radio) in the US:

— As for Obama's claim that under his watch the economy has created 5 million jobs in the past 30 months, NPR's John Ydstie says that's true.

Maybe 30 minutes ago the CNN factcheckers said this was false because the number is 4.4 million as Obama's campaign has been saying but they apparently decided to round up 600,000 jobs for the debate. They also added (as UG stated) the economy lost about that much at the same time so there wasn't much of any net gain.

[maidu]

— As for Obama's claim that under his watch the economy has created 5 million jobs in the past 30 months, NPR's John Ydstie says that's true.

He also says that it "ignores an inconvenient truth (for the president), that about the same number of jobs were lost during Obama's first year in office". The fact-checkers found fault with both candidates.

"first year in office" .....one would assume a person's first year in office was profoundly affected by his predecessor's decisions during the prior 8 years.

Here's a topic which isn't touched upon: first some background: though nearly every industrialized country in the world (China, Canada, Australia, most of Europe, etc) allows its farmers to grow hemp, the US does not. A hemp advocating group recently graded the four presidential candidates on their stance on hemp.

Gary Johnson (Libertarian) scored an A+

Jill Stein (Green Party) A+

Obama and Romney both scored F

details here

Perhaps we should be kind to Romney, because, by his own admission, he

what hemp is. Really!

additional info, including Q&A's about: why allowing farmers to grow hemp is 'win win' for everyone.

Edited October 5, 2012 by maidu

[Ulysses G.]

— As for Obama's claim that under his watch the economy has created 5 million jobs in the past 30 months, NPR's John Ydstie says that's true.

He also says that it "ignores an inconvenient truth (for the president), that about the same number of jobs were lost during Obama's first year in office". The fact-checkers found fault with both candidates.

"first year in office" .....one would assume a person's first year in office was profoundly affected by his predecessor's decisions during the prior 8 years.

Perhaps, but another inconvenient truth is that the jobs created don't even keep up with population growth. Either way, Obama's record is nothing to brag about.

[chiangmaikelly]

Was Obama rattled by developing donor scandal story?

President Obama reelection campaign, rattled by his Wednesday night debate performance, could be in for even worse news. According to knowlegable sources, a national magazine and a national web site are preparing a blockbuster donor scandal story.

http://washingtonexaminer.com/article/2509895/#.UG4xM1YvlRT

[Ulysses G.]

He was rattled by having to face up to his lousy record without some shyster there making excuses for him.

Edited October 5, 2012 by Ulysses G.

[maidu]

Was Obama rattled by developing donor scandal story?

President Obama reelection campaign, rattled by his Wednesday night debate performance, could be in for even worse news. According to knowlegable sources, a national magazine and a national web site are preparing a blockbuster donor scandal story.

http://washingtonexa...5/#.UG4xM1YvlRT

is it against US law to make a campaign donation using a credit card? The article mentioned "small dollar donations" so that further dilutes whatever tempests they're trying to formulate in a teapot.

Is the Washington Examiner the paper that's owned by the Korean Moon (self-professed Christian prophet) family?

What they should be investigating is the weird law which describes corporations as people, in order to enable corporations (posing as 'individual people') to donate large dollar amounts to election campaigns. Most large corps favor Republicans candidates (money gravitates to money), and Romney himself claimed that

'corporations are people' in order to justify such donations. It wouldn't surprise anyone if corporations put pressure on their employees to 'donate' (to a fund, for example) to aid particular candidates which were favorable to the corporations .....err, .....people running them.

[Ulysses G.]

What they really should be investigating is the the mainstream media ignoring important stories and putting a big spin on others in order to make the current administration look better until after the election. Something should be done about it.

[theslime]

What they really should be investigating is the the mainstream media ignoring important stories and putting a big spin on others in order to make the current administration look better until after the election. Something should be done about it.

What about investigating Murdoch Media lying in Bed with the Churchy Republicans. How many USA corporations sent jobs overseas then have the cheek to bag and bankroll a smear campaign over Mr.Obama,s attempts to get more jobs. Mind you maybe the Media should delve into why someone would complain about jobs while driving a Honda/ Nissan and not a home made product. Thats right Capitalism the Republicans Mantra makes more money in the Third world so <deleted> the Local jobs.

[beechguy]

What they really should be investigating is the the mainstream media ignoring important stories and putting a big spin on others in order to make the current administration look better until after the election. Something should be done about it.

What about investigating Murdoch Media lying in Bed with the Churchy Republicans. How many USA corporations sent jobs overseas then have the cheek to bag and bankroll a smear campaign over Mr.Obama,s attempts to get more jobs. Mind you maybe the Media should delve into why someone would complain about jobs while driving a Honda/ Nissan and not a home made product. Thats right Capitalism the Republicans Mantra makes more money in the Third world so <deleted> the Local jobs.

In case you haven't noticed, Hondas and Nissans are also now built in the U.S. but as usual, no need to let the facts get in the way is there.

Edited October 5, 2012 by beechguy

[theslime]

What they really should be investigating is the the mainstream media ignoring important stories and putting a big spin on others in order to make the current administration look better until after the election. Something should be done about it.

What about investigating Murdoch Media lying in Bed with the Churchy Republicans. How many USA corporations sent jobs overseas then have the cheek to bag and bankroll a smear campaign over Mr.Obama,s attempts to get more jobs. Mind you maybe the Media should delve into why someone would complain about jobs while driving a Honda/ Nissan and not a home made product. Thats right Capitalism the Republicans Mantra makes more money in the Third world so <deleted> the Local jobs.

In case you haven't noticed, Hondas and Nissans are also now built in the U.S. but as usual, no need to let the facts get in the way is there.

OK, not being from that part of the world I fergot . At my Local GM plant most of the workers cars are Asian built. What about a media campaign on Corporate America and how many jobs have been lost overseas and then blaming the Democrates for not creating enough jobs.

[koheesti]

What they really should be investigating is the the mainstream media ignoring important stories and putting a big spin on others in order to make the current administration look better until after the election. Something should be done about it.

What about investigating Murdoch Media lying in Bed with the Churchy Republicans. How many USA corporations sent jobs overseas then have the cheek to bag and bankroll a smear campaign over Mr.Obama,s attempts to get more jobs. Mind you maybe the Media should delve into why someone would complain about jobs while driving a Honda/ Nissan and not a home made product. Thats right Capitalism the Republicans Mantra makes more money in the Third world so <deleted> the Local jobs.

The Left's favorite brand is Apple and they are all made in China. When will they give up their Macbooks, iPads, iPhones, in protest?

[koheesti]

Fact checking...

Of course both candidates stretched the truth a bit in the debate, they are politicians, it's in their nature. But how they dealt with it during the debate is very important. If you watch the debate, Romney constantly called Obama on his lies but Obama rarely if ever challenged Romney. I've read in the MSM how Romney told so many lies and asking why Obama didn't say anything. I wonder how many of those 60+ million who watched are thinking that maybe they don't want a president who either doesn't have enough knowledge or the guts to confront someone "lying" to him? Obama looked helpless and weak.

[belg]

^{hey, after a comedian (ronald) becomming president and playing stockpile with nukes and the russians, with a daddy and son in the oil business with saudis, with a sex addicted clown for president with clinton, it was time for a black president.... they got him, he failed.... next}

[Ulysses G.]

This is pretty funny. A Breitbart reporter asked a bunch of UW Madison students that support Obama if it was unfair that Obama was not allowed to use a teleprompter in the debate and they said it was unfair. One thought it was not only unfair to President Obama but to both candidates

http://www.breitbart...mpter-in-Debate

Edited October 6, 2012 by Ulysses G.

[maidu]

Fact checking...

Of course both candidates stretched the truth a bit in the debate, they are politicians, it's in their nature. But how they dealt with it during the debate is very important. If you watch the debate, Romney constantly called Obama on his lies but Obama rarely if ever challenged Romney. I've read in the MSM how Romney told so many lies and asking why Obama didn't say anything. I wonder how many of those 60+ million who watched are thinking that maybe they don't want a president who either doesn't have enough knowledge or the guts to confront someone "lying" to him? Obama looked helpless and weak.

Admittedly, Obama chose not to go in to attack mode as much as Romney did. Romney looked good up on the stage, but the American people are not necessarily swayed by the candidate who is most aggressive. Most of us have probably experienced a family or sports team dynamic (in my case, it's bar bands) where there's one person who is twice as aggressive in their manner and speech, than any one else in the group. That might score points for some people in some situations, but often it's a turn off.

[Asiantravel]

Was Obama rattled by developing donor scandal story?

President Obama reelection campaign, rattled by his Wednesday night debate performance, could be in for even worse news. According to knowlegable sources, a national magazine and a national web site are preparing a blockbuster donor scandal story.

http://washingtonexa...5/#.UG4xM1YvlRT

is it against US law to make a campaign donation using a credit card? The article mentioned "small dollar donations" so that further dilutes whatever tempests they're trying to formulate in a teapot.

Is the Washington Examiner the paper that's owned by the Korean Moon (self-professed Christian prophet) family?

What they should be investigating is the weird law which describes corporations as people, in order to enable corporations (posing as 'individual people') to donate large dollar amounts to election campaigns. Most large corps favor Republicans candidates (money gravitates to money), and Romney himself claimed that

'corporations are people' in order to justify such donations. It wouldn't surprise anyone if corporations put pressure on their employees to 'donate' (to a fund, for example) to aid particular candidates which were favorable to the corporations .....err, .....people running them.

well if correct surely this kind of practice doesn't sound right ?

What the Obama campaign does is not require the use of the credit card verification code on the back side of the card. This allows people to make up names under which to contribute and it also permits foreigners to make illegal campaign donations. I have printed excerpts of email solicitations send to a friend in Eastern Europe who is not a citizen . He got similar solicitations in 2008. They have been rather brazen about the practice, but the FEC has so far done nothing to my knowledge.

http://prairiepundit...ible-obama.html

If this election was based on counting scandals instead of votes Obama would be a clear winner

Edited October 6, 2012 by Asiantravel

[koheesti]

Fact checking...

Of course both candidates stretched the truth a bit in the debate, they are politicians, it's in their nature. But how they dealt with it during the debate is very important. If you watch the debate, Romney constantly called Obama on his lies but Obama rarely if ever challenged Romney. I've read in the MSM how Romney told so many lies and asking why Obama didn't say anything. I wonder how many of those 60+ million who watched are thinking that maybe they don't want a president who either doesn't have enough knowledge or the guts to confront someone "lying" to him? Obama looked helpless and weak.

Admittedly, Obama chose not to go in to attack mode as much as Romney did. Romney looked good up on the stage, but the American people are not necessarily swayed by the candidate who is most aggressive. Most of us have probably experienced a family or sports team dynamic (in my case, it's bar bands) where there's one person who is twice as aggressive in their manner and speech, than any one else in the group. That might score points for some people in some situations, but often it's a turn off.

Perhaps, but calling someone out for lying about you and/or your policies in front of tens of millions of people watching IS NOT being aggressive. It's weak. I don't think Obama corrected what he thought was untrue because Obama doesn't know himself. He gave a rousing speech the day after the debates...a speech written by someone else that he read from a teleprompter. So he's good at reading what other people think, but was incapable the other night of thinking for himself. He didn't "answer" Romney's aggressiveness, he just regurgitated talking points fed to him by the smarter people he has as advisers. That much was obvious at the debate, painfully obvious for Obama's string pullers.

Edited October 6, 2012 by koheesti