Presidental Debate One

So again, yeah, these are the Obama deficits. The Bush wars against brown ppl etc etc are over yet we will still use the "war spending" indefinitely.

So because his presidency is over, we absolve him of the responsibility of running up a 1.2 trillion dollar deficit, and then proceed to blame the next guy in office for not being able to recover that much money in taxes from the American people, which was also coupled by the fact the global economy suffered massive depression?

And yet we also blame him for the slow recovery rate, but can't afford to give praise for finding ways to stimulate such a recovery at all, where other current candidates have proven themselves to fail?

If that was directed at me, I was just saying why I think defense spending (to whatever end) is popular, not why it's good.

Pretty sure his reply was to Amandarius

It's almost as small as the incidence rate of voter fraud too.

but i want to talk about meeeeeeeeee :(

One and done.

Nobama~

The logic here just doesn't make sense. Recovery spending is a fraction of this "war spending" (there's a chart I posted earlier with a source attached to it). How does domestic spending magically absolve the responsibility of a previous administration for its own reckless spending?

yes

The empty chair needs a donut cushion after that.

I smell a birther up in heeeeeya

And I smell uneducated liberal panic. =)

Pardon my redundancy.

Idiot.

No its not recovery spending. This was the money allocated for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan that was the largest parts of the deficits of the Bush administration. The money that Obama time and time again refers to as "two wars we didnt pay for." Money we never should have borrowed or used. But as the wars end, Obama still wants to use this same money, that we never should have borrowed, year after year for other things now. I don't see why you cannot see the hypocrisy in that.

You're free to vote for whichever candidate you want, but please vote responsibly, and intelligently. Look at the facts. This is why Independant and Swing voters tend to be the most crucial to an election campaign.

Mudslinging simply DOES NOT WORK. Avoiding issues by speweing repeated rhetoric DOES NOT WORK. Simply ignoring the facts in the hopes your candidate wins DOES NOT WORK. Independant and Swing voters rely on accurate information to make an *gasp* informed decision.

Those of us who support Obama, in and out of the US, can make cases for and against him. Sometimes he'll even make cases against himself.

If libs could see hypocrisy their worlds would implode and the average American IQ would double instantly.

panic, yes and no, i guess

if romney is actually able to win the election on account of debate performance after months of voters being steadily turned off by everything they see and hear in all the campaigning that is not debates*, america will truly have the president it deserves




*for real you guys almost picked rick santorum over this guy, he is that unelectable

You merited step accuracy.

I'm impressed you have the brain power to spell Vagisil.

Don't seriously respond to Tenshibaby. He has yet to make any meaningful contribution to these boards beyond the sheer entertainment value of metaphorically watching a monkey throwing its own feces when threatened.

As though you have seen the REAL Romney and not the liberal propaganda's version. But then again the generation that likely makes up the bulk of this forum thinks propaganda is the norm.

in my defense, had i known he had merited step accuracy i would have just left it at that


the real romney would be campaigning on his signature legislative achievement, which is so expansive and successful as to warrant serious consideration of his candidacy purely on its own merits, knowing presidents have been made of much less

the real romney would be going after obama where he is unquestionably weak, primarily regarding civil liberties. he would quite rightly challenge liberals to answer for how we tore our hair out over targeted killings and wiretapping and such during the bush years but are consipcuously silent right now, and might even successfully siphon leftist votes from obama by doing so

i have quietly noted the absence of this romney over the past few years

It would not be because of debates. They will serve to introduce Mitt Romney to the portion of the country that never saw him before besides from negative advertisements. And for people that actually listened to him without any preconceived notions might have been open to his ideas. Even so, this still would not be enough under normal circumstances to unseat an incumbant President. If Obama loses it is simply because unemployment is over 8%, underemplyment nearly twice that, gas is over 4 dollars a gallon, there is massive inflation and his arguement is that he just needs more time because his ideas are actually working albeit slowly.

Well having 20 college credit hours for every tooth in your head helps.

You just need this to be true. Weren't you warned about ad hominem attacks?

Yes, DPS OR GTFO, right?

Pot, kettle.

/em hands you a dictionary and points to "ad hominem".

Fine, you guys stick to dancing, leave the politics to those of us who know what we are talking about.