# The second presidential debate: 10/16/2012 **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [October 16, 2012, 4:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847 "2012-10-16T04:35:45Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 39
**Author:** ![Debaser](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/3da27b/32.png) [@Debaser](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Debaser)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2012, 2:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847/761 "2012-10-17T14:54:55Z")
> [@Fiddle\_Peghead](#): > > Did you see how Romney _attempted_ to put words in Obama’s mouth during the contentious exchange over drilling of Federal lands? He wanted Obama to say something about the decline of their use, but Obama clearly had the upper hand with his explanation of why he acted as he did, and his stressing of the fact that oil production is at the highest levels here in years. It was just one example of how try as he might, Romney wasn’t able to counter the stronger debater last night. Actually they both failed fairly badly in that exchange. Romney was right that drilling is way down. That raw fact was on his side. He was flabbergasted that Obama would deny the plain truth of that. But he was being misleading because the reason drilling is down so much is because of the Deepwater Horizon disaster and it’s aftermath. Obama failed to bring this up, which would have been a good point for him to score. I’d say this one went 0-0. ---
**Author:** ![DigitalC](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ebca7d/32.png) [@DigitalC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DigitalC)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2012, 2:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847/762 "2012-10-17T14:56:33Z")
> [@Debaser](#): > > I’m not sure what you’re trying to parse this into but it was clearly a biased debate. She was hostile to Romney the whole night. Her “slip” was that she blatantly entered the debate on the side of her candidate. It certainly showed her bias. She was hostile to the one who kept trying to break the rules? you don’t say, next you are gonna tell me cops are meaner to criminals than regular civilians. If Romney wants a moderator that will treat them equally maybe he shouldn’t try so hard to act like a total prick and follow the rules. ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2012, 2:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847/763 "2012-10-17T14:56:38Z")
> [@Fiddle\_Peghead](#): > > Did you see how Romney _attempted_ to put words in Obama’s mouth during the contentious exchange over drilling of Federal lands? He wanted Obama to say something about the decline of their use, but Obama clearly had the upper hand with his explanation of why he acted as he did, and his stressing of the fact that oil production is at the highest levels here in years. It was just one example of how try as he might, Romney wasn’t able to counter the stronger debater last night. I also saw NBC fact check this, and surprisingly Romney lied. Over Obama’s term, oil production on federal lands is up about 10%. Relative to LAST YEAR, it has fallen, but that’s not the point Romney was lying- er stressing. ---
**Author:** ![pseudotriton\_ruber\_ruber](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/a9a28c/32.png) [@pseudotriton\_ruber\_ruber](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pseudotriton_ruber_ruber)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2012, 2:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847/764 "2012-10-17T14:57:44Z")
> [@Fiddle\_Peghead](#): > > If you’re saying that Crowley planned ahead of time to be in the tank for Obama, then I don’t think it makes sense to call it a “slip”, that’s all. And her comment immediately after to Romney, hurriedly put forth, plainly suggests to me that she knew she had screwed up. In a way, what you’re doing here is akin to Romney’s vacillations about Obama. You could make the case that Crowley was incompetent, or you could make the case that she was malevolent. It’s hard to make both simultaneously, but because your base is split down the middle you try to make both cases together, which strains your credibility. Pick a lie and stick to it, for Christ’s sake. ---
**Author:** ![Andiethewestie](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ba9def/32.png) [@Andiethewestie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Andiethewestie)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2012, 2:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847/765 "2012-10-17T14:58:27Z")
> [@Barkis\_is\_Willin](#): > > The part that’s open to interpretation is that his “acts of terror” remark on 9/12 came after speaking about the 2001 attacks. Therefore, it’s ambiguous as to which attack he was referring to as a terror attack. In the days directly after that, neither he nor his staff would call it an act of terror, which also lends some ambiguity to his original comment. > > I’m not sure what it is that I can’t handle. I said above that Obama performed very well last night. I’m just saying the debate as a whole, and that instance in particular, was very poorly moderated by Crowley. Geesus, What the fuck is the difference between “acts of terror” and “terrorism”? He said it in the Rose Garden. DEAL with it. It happened the day after the attack. Are the Repubs so stupid as to think that if it was an act of terrorism that Obama had to go in with guns blazing before finding out the full situation? Doesn’t it make sense to understand the full extent of the security breech and why it didn’t happen? Would the request for heightened security for the Embassy in Tripoli and not a compound in Benghazi have anything to do with it? Would the confluence of violent acts and protests have anything to do with what happened here? And then ask yourself How fucking long did it take W to react after 911? I’ll wait. Let’s not foget that Romney stood out there and accused the President of being uncaring, imbecile running off to a Vegas fundraiser. It’s okay to insult the President when he just lost great people that he felt a responsibility to? ---
**Author:** ![Debaser](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/3da27b/32.png) [@Debaser](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Debaser)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2012, 2:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847/766 "2012-10-17T14:58:53Z")
> [@pseudotriton\_ruber\_ruber](#): > > Face it, you got your ass kicked HARD last night. No we didn’t. Polling shows that everyone basically felt “their guy” won. It’s possible that one or the other might have scored a point or two more with the actual swing voters. But, who knows? Really, you are talking about people too dumb to have made their minds up about who they are voting for yet. > [@](#): > > See how this whining about Ms. Crowley goes over with the independent voters in swing states. I don’t think most of them will even know or care what you’re whining about. You are right. Crowley and the overall debate bias towards Obama will probably go unnoticed by the independent voters, despite the huge favor that it gave to him. That’s unfair, and it sucks. But it is true. Twenty years ago there was nothing we could do about it. Now at least there are a few right wing and center news sources who will at least attempt to balance it out. But you are right. Overall the liberal media bias is a huge help to Obama. ---
**Author:** ![Kozmik](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/8dc957/32.png) [@Kozmik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kozmik)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2012, 3:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847/767 "2012-10-17T15:00:19Z")
The President mentioned Iowa in reference to wind power. He mentioned manufacturing. He needs to mention the economy of Oregon, Washington - Boeing, Microsoft. Virginia should turn out to be as much of a battleground state as Ohio. And, counter-inuititvely, New England states should come into play. Remember, Romney was Governor of a New England state. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2012, 3:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847/768 "2012-10-17T15:01:02Z")
> [@Debaser](#): > > Actually they both failed fairly badly in that exchange. Romney was right that drilling is way down. That raw fact was on his side. He was flabbergasted that Obama would deny the plain truth of that. But he was being misleading because the reason drilling is down so much is because of the Deepwater Horizon disaster and it’s aftermath. Obama failed to bring this up, which would have been a good point for him to score. I’d say this one went 0-0. Irrelevant, since the gotcha point Romney was trying to make was about the number of _permits_, not the number of _drilling operations_. This attempt at obfuscation is particularly lame given that Obama’s rebuttal was _focused precisely on the distinction between the two_ (the use-it-or-lose-it policy on permits, which put some of them into the “lose it” column). ---
**Author:** ![zamboniracer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/e9a140/32.png) [@zamboniracer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/zamboniracer)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2012, 3:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847/769 "2012-10-17T15:01:36Z")
> [@Debaser](#): > > You really don’t know the answer to this? > > There are a couple of possibilities: > > 1. Obama’s administration, at every level, truly didn’t know that there was a terror attack at the embassy for 12 or so days. This would obviously be a huge intelligence failure that SecState Clinton is now attempting to take the blame for. > > 2. Obama’s administration is embarrassed that their middle east policy is a failure and that organized terrorists are able to plan and carry out an attack on our embassy. They spin the events for a few news cycles that it was all a protest gone wrong over a video no one has seen before. This results in other actual protests because now everyone has seen the video and buries the real story that there was an organized terrorist attack. It almost worked. Of course, those aren’t the only possibilities. There is at least one more: 1. The administration knew that the attack was from terrorists but had no reason to announce that fact. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2012, 3:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847/770 "2012-10-17T15:02:48Z")
> [@pseudotriton\_ruber\_ruber](#): > > In a way, what you’re doing here is akin to Romney’s vacillations about Obama. You could make the case that Crowley was incompetent, or you could make the case that she was malevolent. It’s hard to make both simultaneously, but because your base is split down the middle you try to make both cases together, which strains your credibility. > > Pick a lie and stick to it, for Christ’s sake. “Your Honor, my client never touched this car. Also, this car was already damaged when my client took possession. Finally, this car was in perfect condition when my client returned it.” > [@Andiethewestie](#): > > Geesus, What the fuck is the difference between “acts of terror” and “terrorism”? He said it in the Rose Garden. DEAL with it. It happened the day after the attack. > Are the Repubs so stupid as to think that if it was an act of terrorism that Obama had to go in with guns blazing before finding out the full situation? Why not? That’s what a real man like – well, Republicans don’t like to speak his name any more, but it’s purely out of reverence, yeah, that’s the ticket, reverence – would do, dangit! ---
**Author:** ![Fiddle\_Peghead](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fiddle_peghead/32/3506_2.png) [@Fiddle\_Peghead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fiddle_Peghead)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2012, 3:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847/771 "2012-10-17T15:03:02Z")
> [@Debaser](#): > > Actually they both failed fairly badly in that exchange. I don’t know, I think Obama wanted to make the point that overall production is up, which he did, and what does it matter what lands the oil comes from? He clearly explained that some companies that had been granted leases, who weren’t doing any drilling, had them revoked. ---
**Author:** ![Frylock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ce7236/32.png) [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2012, 3:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847/772 "2012-10-17T15:04:24Z")
> [@Debaser](#): > > Polling shows that everyone basically felt “their guy” won. [What polling?](http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/17/instant-reaction-polls-show-narrow-obama-advantage-in-second-debate/#more-36216). The numbers at the link seem to indicate a much wider advantage for Obama in the debate polls than he enjoys in the election polls. ---
**Author:** ![Debaser](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/3da27b/32.png) [@Debaser](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Debaser)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2012, 3:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847/773 "2012-10-17T15:04:24Z")
> [@pseudotriton\_ruber\_ruber](#): > > In a way, what you’re doing here is akin to Romney’s vacillations about Obama. You could make the case that Crowley was incompetent, or you could make the case that she was malevolent. It’s hard to make both simultaneously, but because your base is split down the middle you try to make both cases together, which strains your credibility. > > Pick a lie and stick to it, for Christ’s sake. I don’t know why it can’t be both. She wants Obama to win and leans towards him on the issues. However, she also wants to appear to be fair and unbiased. But she failed in that, in epic fashion. It will go down in history as one of the worst moderated debates ever. That is her incompetence. That’s regarding her slip to enter the debate on Obama’s side. As to the questions asked: I don’t know if she tried to pick fair questions and failed or if she was knowingly stacking the deck for Obama, but either way the result was clear. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2012, 3:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847/774 "2012-10-17T15:04:36Z")
> [@Debaser](#): > > No we didn’t. Polling shows that everyone basically felt “their guy” won. It’s possible that one or the other might have scored a point or two more with the actual swing voters. But, who knows? Really, you are talking about people too dumb to have made their minds up about who they are voting for yet. Nope. The polling shows a clear, if not huge, victory for Obama. Not as lopsided as debate #1, but the polling does indeed show that viewers thought Obama won. The losers almost always complain about the moderator. The fact is, all Crowley did was try to keep the candidates on topic and moving along, and occasionally (maybe once) actually interject with a fact. Romney was wrong about “acts of terror”- Obama did say that the day after. Yes there was confusion for several days about the exact nature of the attack, and I suppose that was Romney’s main point (as weak a point as it is, IMO), but he doubled-down on something that was false. Obama did indeed call it an “act of terror”. ---
**Author:** ![Debaser](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/3da27b/32.png) [@Debaser](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Debaser)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2012, 3:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847/775 "2012-10-17T15:06:07Z")
> [@DigitalC](#): > > If Romney wants a moderator that will treat them equally maybe he shouldn’t try so hard to act like a total prick and follow the rules. What rule did he break? If he didn’t insist on equal time Obama would have continued to speak for minutes longer on every question. Crowley gave Obama the last word, or attempted to on nearly every question. When facing a hostile debate moderator and questions and format, you have to fight for equality. I don’t know what other choice Romney had. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2012, 3:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847/776 "2012-10-17T15:07:19Z")
> [@zamboniracer](#): > > Of course, those aren’t the only possibilities. There is at least one more: > > 1. The administration knew that the attack was from terrorists but had no reason to announce that fact. In fact, that’s clearly the best policy. It denies terrorists the attention and fear they seek, while leaving the decks clear for rationally planned countermeasures. ---
**Author:** ![Debaser](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/3da27b/32.png) [@Debaser](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Debaser)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2012, 3:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847/777 "2012-10-17T15:10:49Z")
> [@Steve\_MB](#): > > In fact, that’s clearly the best policy. It denies terrorists the attention and fear they seek, while leaving the decks clear for rationally planned countermeasures. But it’s clearly not what the administration was doing. He went around talking loudly about the video for over a week. Saying you won’t comment on an ongoing investigation is one thing. That wasn’t what happened. The administration at all levels was blaming the incident on a protest over a video. This just wasn’t true. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2012, 3:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847/778 "2012-10-17T15:12:37Z")
> [@Debaser](#): > > As to the questions asked: I don’t know if she tried to pick fair questions and failed or if she was knowingly stacking the deck for Obama, but either way the result was clear. Right now, Romney can only _wish_ the questions had been stacked in favor of Obama. If that had been the case, the Libya question would have been rejected out of hand (being the big GOP talking point of the past week), and Romney wouldn’t have stepped on his dick in front of a few dozen million people. ---
**Author:** ![Debaser](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/3da27b/32.png) [@Debaser](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Debaser)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2012, 3:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847/779 "2012-10-17T15:13:00Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Obama did indeed call it an “act of terror”. No he didn’t. He used the term “act of terror” in exactly two instances in all of his speeches for the twelve days after the attacks. At no time did he use it referring to the attacks. Instead he called the attackers “killers” or words other than terrorists. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2012, 3:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847/780 "2012-10-17T15:13:00Z")
> [@zamboniracer](#): > > Of course, those aren’t the only possibilities. There is at least one more: > > 1. The administration knew that the attack was from terrorists but had no reason to announce that fact. No reason other than telling us the truth, that is. If they didn’t know or didn’t want to say they should have said that. But claiming it was the result of the nutty video was stupid, since they should have known that would be debunked. I don’t see this as some huge issue, but no need to give Obama a pass just because he’s our guy. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847.md?page=38) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847.md?page=40)