Am I the only person bewildered to learn that somebody won that debate?

[Debaser]

The key difference was that while both Obama and Romney spewed talking points, Romney also effectively refuted the points of Obama. Obama would make five points attacking Romney and Romney would take them apart one by one. Obama on the other hand basically wasted his time by rambling and getting off topic and wasting his time.

People were mad that Romney interrupted and steamrolled the moderator, but had he not done so Obama would have spoken eight or ten minutes longer than him instead of just four.

[spazurek]

@Debaser

The key difference was that while both Obama and Romney spewed talking points, Romney also effectively refuted the points of Obama. Obama would make five points attacking Romney and Romney would take them apart one by one.

Well here we’re just going to have to agree to disagree. Sum total of Romney’s defense:
-“That’s not true.”
-“I have five boys, repeating something over and over doesn’t make it true.”
-“As president you get your own plane but you don’t get to make up your own facts.”

Lots of creative and not-so-creative ways to say “not true”. Ok…so, then, how will you maintain revenue, specifically? “Kill PBS”.

[mlees]

I had the TV on to the debate while I played WoW, so I just listened to the debate, and missed all the visual ques.

At the very end, I thought to myself that neither really won, as both seemed to stick to the talking points that they have been saying on the campaign trails. (There was a couple small “zingers” on both sides.)

But then I listened to both FNC and MSNBC, and both declared a victory for Romney based on not the “substance” of the topics, but on the “style” of their presentation.

Romney seemed to have more energy than Obama, and stuff like that.

I guess you had to see it [the debate], and not just hear or read it.

[Bridget_Burke]

@spazurek

I took it as “I’m not playing that game. Let’s talk about a 5 trillion dollar tax cut, not Big Bird”. Apparently a losing gambit.

A bit later, Neil deGrasse Tysontweeted *his *response…

Cutting PBS support (0.012% of budget) to help balance the Federal budget is like deleting text files to make room on your 500Gig hard drive

(Heh…“tweeted”)

[spazurek]

@mlees

I guess you had to see it [the debate], and not just hear or read it.

Not in my case…I saw it, but apparently missed what everyone else saw…

[Debaser]

@spazurek

Well here we’re just going to have to agree to disagree. Sum total of Romney’s defense:
-“That’s not true.”
-“I have five boys, repeating something over and over doesn’t make it true.”
-“As president you get your own plane but you don’t get to make up your own facts.”

Lots of creative and not-so-creative ways to say “not true”. Ok…so, then, how will you maintain revenue, specifically? “Kill PBS”.

Here’s a transcript. Maybe that will help your memory.

[Debaser]

Here is just one instance of Romney responding directly to Obama and refuting him point for point.

21:11:03: ROMNEY: Well, sure. I’d like to clear up the record and go through it piece by piece.
First of all, I don’t have a $5 trillion tax cut. I don’t have a tax cut of a scale that you’re talking about. My view is that we ought to provide tax relief to people in the middle class. But I’m not going to reduce the share of taxes paid by high-income people. High-income people are doing just fine in this economy. They’ll do fine whether you’re president or I am.
The people who are having the hard time right now are middle- income Americans. Under the president’s policies, middle-income Americans have been buried. They’re just being crushed. Middle- income Americans have seen their income come down by $4,300. This is a – this is a tax in and of itself. I’ll call it the economy tax. It’s been crushing.
At the same time, gasoline prices have doubled under the president. Electric rates are up. Food prices are up. Health care costs have gone up by $2,500 a family. Middle-income families are being crushed.
And so the question is how to get them going again. And I’ve described it. It’s energy and trade, the right kind of training programs, balancing our budget and helping small business. Those are the – the cornerstones of my plan.
But the president mentioned a couple of other ideas I’ll just note. First, education. I agree: Education is key, particularly the future of our economy. But our training programs right now, we’ve got 47 of them, housed in the federal government, reporting to eight different agencies. Overhead is overwhelming. We’ve got to get those dollars back to the states and go to the workers so they can create their own pathways to get in the training they need for jobs that will really help them.
The second area, taxation, we agree, we ought to bring the tax rates down. And I do, both for corporations and for individuals. But in order for us not to lose revenue, have the government run out of money, I also lower deductions and credits and exemptions, so that we keep taking in the same money when you also account for growth.
The third area, energy. Energy is critical, and the president pointed out correctly that production of oil and gas in the U.S. is up. But not due to his policies. In spite of his policies.
Mr. President, all of the increase in natural gas and oil has happened on private land, not on government land. On government land, your administration has cut the number of permits and licenses in half. If I’m president, I’ll double them, and also get the – the oil from offshore and Alaska. And I’ll bring that pipeline in from Canada.
And, by the way, I like coal. I’m going to make sure we can continue to burn clean coal. People in the coal industry feel like it’s getting crushed by your policies. I want to get America and North America energy independent so we can create those jobs.
And finally, with regards to that tax cut, look, I’m not looking to cut massive taxes and to reduce the – the revenues going to the government. My – my number-one principal is, there will be no tax cut that adds to the deficit. I want to underline that: no tax cut that adds to the deficit.
But I do want to reduce the burden being paid by middle-income Americans. And I – and to do that, that also means I cannot reduce the burden paid by high-income Americans. So any – any language to the contrary is simply not accurate.

[etv78]

@mlees

I had the TV on to the debate while I played WoW, so I just listened to the debate, and missed all the visual ques.

At the very end, I thought to myself that neither really won, as both seemed to stick to the talking points that they have been saying on the campaign trails. (There was a couple small “zingers” on both sides.)

But then I listened to both FNC and MSNBC, and both declared a victory for Romney based on not the “substance” of the topics, but on the “style” of their presentation.

Romney seemed to have more energy than Obama, and stuff like that.

I guess you had to see it [the debate], and not just hear or read it.

Using JFK/Nixon as the Ur example: People who watched (TV) though Kennedy won, people who listened (radio) thought Nixon won.

[mlees]

@etv78

Using JFK/Nixon as the Ur example: People who watched (TV) though Kennedy won, people who listened (radio) thought Nixon won.

Right, I had heard of the effect before now. This was one of the few times I actually went through it myself.

[Procrustus]

@spazurek

So I’m really the only person who didn’t see the “lack of energy”? My social ineptitude must be acting up.

I didn’t see it either. He looked perfectly normal to me. However, I know that I’m socially inept.

[spazurek]

@Debaser

Here is just one instance of Romney responding directly to Obama and refuting him point for point.

To sum up:
Obama: “Your massive tax cut will increase the deficit.”
Romney: “No it won’t.”

[Anduril]

I think most people who declared Romney a “winner” are basing it on the fact that he raised more arguments that were countered very weakly by Obama and he was able to counter very well a lot of the arguments that Obama raised.

I, for one, don’t think that debates will settle the arguments but it’s really more of a beauty contest. At the end of the day, Romney was confident, energetic and he displayed a command of what he was talking about. Obama - not so much.

[you_with_the_face]

@spazurek

I keep thinking that it must be “I like Obama, I thought nobody won, so I guess Romney won”. But that doesn’t seem right – it’s not that I think they each scored equal points, I think they were aiming past each other, basically saying nothing of substance or significance. How can there be a winner when there wasn’t a fight?

This is almost my exact feeling. Except I’d characterize it as Romney trying to pick fight against someone who didn’t feel it was necessary to indulge them in that manner.

[Andiethewestie]

@spazurek

This is why I’m so bewildered. How can so many people say “Obama looked exhausted, bored, etc.” and I not see it at all? He seemed totally exactly like he always does. No zingers…isn’t that how grownups are supposed to behave when discussing the fate of the free world? Has it really come to this, where no zingers = debate lost?

But this is not “exactly” how he always is. The President did not appear as engaged but rather seemingly exasperated looking down a lot, trying to figure out what the hell Romney was saying without doing an Al Gore eyeroll. He knew he’d be scruntinzed for all his gestures.

I still think he was thrown by the disavowed GOP argument up to this debate. How do you debate someone who does a 360 on his own platform? I think Obama did make the argument that we don’t know what Romney is selling, except I think both right and left wanted to see it more forcefully done. This is where I think Obama was exhausted, he tended to blink slowly a few times which led me to infer he seemed physically very tired.

[etv78]

Obama’s been busy, you know, being President and all.

[John_Mace]

@Simplicio

I’m sure its in the eye of the beholder, but I (and it seems most people) thought Obama was abnormally lackluster. He’s usually weaker in debates then other formats…

Indeed. I’m bewildered by people who think he has a good track record as a debater. I was genuinely stunned in '08 how mediocre he was.

[John_Mace]

@etv78

Obama’s been busy, you know, being President and all.

Yeah, it takes time to visit campaign offices and potential voters.

[Feyrat]

I’m actually amazed and discouraged - to the point where I’m now mostly avoiding discussion and news about the election - to hear that people think Romney “won.”

I watched the debate live with friends and my husband. All of us thought that Romney basically came off as a HUGE dick. He trampled over people, he lied left and right, he made faces like he just wanted to punch Obama and the moderator all night… he came off terribly, as far as we could see.

Obama, on the other hand, came off as calm and cool and having his ducks in a row, amusing in places, and not rising to Romney’s obvious juvenile baiting.

And immediately afterwards, everyone started talking about how “energetic and aggressive” Romney was and how that made him the winner? REALLY? He behaved like a tantrumy, lying child the entire time. How does that make him win?

Our first thought was that the media was clearly pissed off that Obama wasn’t providing good “spectacle” and was trying to prod him into that direction. We remember them being pissed off that he didn’t attack McCain more to. But seriously.

I don’t want to live on this planet anymore.

[j666]

I listened to it on the radio.

I thought Romney did a very good job, and definitely “won”. He sounded engaged, passionate, and sincere. Obama sounded like another major clandestine military action was in progress, and he really could not be bothered with this right now.

[newcomer]

One thing people supporting Obama are having difficulty admitting is that he really does not have knowledge of economy and ability to simplify his policy the way Bill Clinton STILL does it. I was hoping Obama would pick up some of the concepts Bill was talking about at the DNC. In fact, his whole response to anything Mitt would say would be line by line from that speech.

As someone mentioned above, it’s not weather you agreed with him or not but Mitt knows his stuff and even if it it may appear impossible it did make sense the way he was laying it down. When Obama did not attack as a response people took it to mean approval. By that measure, Mitt did win.