# 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:** 42
**Author:** ![Gangster\_Octopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a8b319/32.png) [@Gangster\_Octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gangster_Octopus)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2012, 3:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847/821 "2012-10-17T15:54:31Z")
The reason Crowley corrected him was because she was there, in the Rose Garden when Obama made the remarks. She corrected him because she knew Romney was wrong. ---
**Author:** ![DMark](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e68b1a/32.png) [@DMark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DMark)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2012, 3:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847/822 "2012-10-17T15:55:07Z")
From my earlier prediction: > [@DMark](#): > > Romney, on the other hand, has to be careful not to come across as smarmy. He has a tendency to look like a slick used car salesman, and people are quick to pick this up. The more he smiles and puts on his sincere face (especially when stressed and caught in a lie), the more people start to feel their bullshit radar beeping. > > So yeah, we Obama fans will be far happier tonight. But I don’t think Obama will “win” this as much as Romney will “lose” this for himself. My guess is that after all is said and done tonight, people will call Obama “Presidential” in his approach and consider Romney less convincing. My snapshot from this debate was Romney, strutting forward, chin out and ready for attack, jumping on the fact that Obama never said it was a terrorist act. He was poised for the knockout punch and suddenly had the wind taken out of him by Obama and Crowley when they said that no, Obama had indeed stated it was an act of terror. You could see Romney’s body language just itching to throw that punch, but shot down and royally pissed. At that point, for me at least, Romney came across as the asshole CEO boss who didn’t like to be told he was wrong and somebody was damned well going to pay and be fired for this screw up. If I were coaching Obama for the next debate, I would try to find a way to get Romney riled again on any number of points. Mitt doesn’t handle being caught in a lie well. He is slick, and can twist facts quickly, but when he is actually forced to admit/hear something he has said is wrong, he gets visibly tense and defensive. I am obviously not a fan of Romney, but there is a mean, vindictive streak in him that I did not know he had. I would do my best to get that to show up again in the final debate. ---
**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, 3:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847/823 "2012-10-17T15:58:04Z")
> [@Debaser](#): > > It’s a really bad one. I’m sure you think so. I’m also sure you think last night’s debate was a bad one, and that Obama’s devastating remarks to Romney’s blatent lies were bad responses, and that his presidency is also a bad one. But, your value judgments aside, you’re not doing much to support any of your cases. ---
**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, 3:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847/824 "2012-10-17T15:58:26Z")
> [@Fiddle\_Peghead](#): > > Can I borrow some of you straw? C’mon, she treated them basically the same, the Libya thing notwithstanding. And again, what were the loaded questions you’re talking about, specifically? I don’t feel like digging through the transcript, but here is a decent [opinion column](http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/oct/17/curl-crowley-skews-hard-obama-disastrous-debate/) headlines on Drudge today that sums it up. > [@](#): > > Another debate, another debacle for America’s media. > In the runup to the second presidential debate, CNN’s Candy Crowley declared that she would not just be a “fly on the wall” as she played the tiny role of moderator, that she would step in whenever she chose to say, “Hey, wait a second, what about X, Y, Z?” > And boy did she, cutting off Republican Mitt Romney repeatedly and often throwing the floor to President Obama with an open “let me give the president a chance here.” > More, she alone decided the topics for the debate, picking questions from the 80 so-called “undecided” voters chosen by the Gallup polling organization. Her selections were tailor-made for Mr. Obama — Mitt Romney’s tax plan, women’s rights and contraception, outsourcing, immigration, the Libya debacle (which gave Mr. Obama to finally say that the buck stops with him, not, as Hillary Clinton said, with her). It goes on to give more specific examples. But this is all qualitative . The quantitative evidence is even more damning. She interrupted Romney 26 times and Obama only nine times, despite the fact that Obama spoke 9% more and was almost always given the last word. ---
**Author:** ![Bosstone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/22d042/32.png) [@Bosstone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bosstone)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2012, 4:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847/825 "2012-10-17T16:01:11Z")
> [@Debaser](#): > > She interrupted Romney 26 times and Obama only nine times, despite the fact that Obama spoke 9% more and was almost always given the last word. If you have two kids and one is well-behaved and the other throws paint on the walls, do you give them both a time-out? ---
**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, 4:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847/826 "2012-10-17T16:01:15Z")
> [@Fiddle\_Peghead](#): > > As for the video, it most surely played a part, as [this](http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/16/world/africa/election-year-stakes-overshadow-nuances-of-benghazi-investigation.html?hp&_r=1&) NY Times article makes clear. The YouTube video was mentioned in the initial reporting. From the front page of _The New York Times_, September 13, 2012: > [@](#): > > Fighters involved in the assault, which was spearheaded by a Islamist brigade formed during last year’s uprising against Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi, said in interviews during the battle that they were moved to attack the mission by anger over a 14- > > _Continued on Page A11_ > > minute American-made video that depicted the Prophet Muhammad, Islam’s founder, as a villainous, homosexual and child-molesting buffoon. Their attack followed by just a few hours the storming of the compound surrounding the United States Embassy in Cairo by an unarmed mob protesting the same video. Also: > [@](#): > > A senior Obama administration officials told reporters during a conference call that “it was clearly a complex attack,” but offered no details. And: > [@](#): > > Interviewed at the scene Tuesday night, many of the attackers and those who backed them said they were determined to defend their faith from the insults in the video. Now, when I turned the page to A14 on that Thursday, and finished reading about the 14-minute American-made video, my :dubious: meter when up. But then I put the headline and the article in context and realized something. > [@Debaser](#): > > 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. Wrong! The administration said “it was clearly a complex attack”. Reporters actually interviewed the attackers (some take issue with that..) and the attackers referred the reporters to the YouTube video. So in the days after the attack, the attack was described as complex. What more do you want? Coordinated? Contrived? Calculated? WTF! ---
**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, 4:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847/827 "2012-10-17T16:02:31Z")
> [@](#): > > Her selections were tailor-made for Mr. Obama — Mitt Romney’s tax plan, women’s rights and contraception, outsourcing, immigration, the Libya debacle Holy shit!! She actually picked questions asking about Romney’s tax plan?? How colossally unfair to poor Mitt! I can see why you’re so upset now. ---
**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, 4:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847/828 "2012-10-17T16:03:42Z")
> [@pseudotriton\_ruber\_ruber](#): > > I’m also sure you think last night’s debate was a bad one Of course it was. Even many Obama supporters acknowledge that Crowley at the vary least overstepped her bounds. It was overwhelmingly biased and that is the whole narrative today, rather than the substance of the debate. How is that not a failure? > [@](#): > > , and that Obama’s devastating remarks to Romney’s blatent lies were bad responses I wouldn’t go so far as calling them “devastating” but I do agree that Obama had a good night and was on top of his game, so you are wrong on this one. > [@](#): > > , and that his presidency is also a bad one. It’s not as bad as I thought it would be, but overall I’d say he was better than I hoped in some areas and bad in others. I judge him on each issue on the merits. > [@](#): > > But, your value judgments aside, you’re not doing much to support any of your cases. I know you wish the few of us that are still here that disagree with you would just leave and have this be another Democratic Underground. Sorry. Not going to happen. Today anyway. ---
**Author:** ![Enkel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/df705f/32.png) [@Enkel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Enkel)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2012, 4:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847/829 "2012-10-17T16:09:38Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > On a side note, Gallup should also be beaten and shot for finding these so called “undecided” voters. What undecided voters cheer when Crowley hits Romney with a left hook? If you were truly undecided, wouldn’t you have listened to that exchange politely to see how it played out? In their defense, that was about the third time that Romney had drug the debate into a “nah, ah… that ain’t true”, “is so true!”, “nah ha..” type of exchange. Then he’d pulled that condescending “I just want to get that on the record” trying to make Obama repeat something… then just as he turned around all smug about to say something more, she cut him off at the knees and, really… who was expecting that? It was a bit Monty Python-esque, so I don’t begrudge them their momentary loss of composure. ---
**Author:** ![you\_with\_the\_face](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/ecccb3/32.png) [@you\_with\_the\_face](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/you_with_the_face)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2012, 4:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847/830 "2012-10-17T16:11:10Z")
The “act of terror” thing was a fail for Romney not just because he was wrong (and once again came across as someone who politicizes national tragedy in the pettiest ways possible). He also came across as weak and uncertain in his accusation, especially after Crowley contradicted him. From the [transcript](http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/10/16/transcript-second-presidential-debate/): > [@](#): > > ROMNEY: It took them a long time to say this was a terrorist act by a terrorist group. And to suggest – **am I incorrect in that regard** , on Sunday, the – your secretary – Am I the only one whose ears homed in on this note of diffidence? My first thought on hearing this was “How are you going to accuse the President of failing to say something appropriately, and not be 100% confident that you’re correct in this characterization? That is not confident leadership. You going to call someone out on someone, be right and _know you’re right._” To me, Romney didn’t perform all that differently than he did in the 1st debate. He continued to disrespect the moderator and the rules of the debate. His tendency to lead with “I don’t” or “I didn’t say that” or “I’m not in favor of” rather than strong, positive, assertive statements such as “As president, my administration will do X, Y, and Z” made him look just as defensive and insecure to me as he did in the 1st debate. He made more gaffes this go around, but he struck me as being less agitated. Being able to pace a little probably helped his nerves. He still tried to bully, though. Seemed forced, like he’d been coached into adopting this debating style recently. What was different this time was that Obama was crisper and more concise. More alert and focused. You didn’t see the wheels turning in his brain as much. He did a better job attacking the things Romney said during the actual debate rather than addressing what Romney had said at previous times. There was less rattling off strings of numbers and more plain language assertions. The same calmness and level-headedness that he showed in the 1st debate was present in this one, but it was received better because he sounded more eloquent this go around. The fact that the undecideds appear a bit undecided on who won this debate should not surprise anyone. Their house could be on fire and they’d be unsure as to whether to evacuate. ---
**Author:** ![Euphonious\_Polemic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/euphonious_polemic/32/3002_2.png) [@Euphonious\_Polemic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Euphonious_Polemic)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2012, 4:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847/831 "2012-10-17T16:13:05Z")
> [@Debaser](#): > > Read my posts. 788. CNN has it seven points to Obama overall and tied with people who are yet to make up their minds. Far from the ass kicking of the last debate, which was what I was responding to. So cherry picking one part of a single poll = tied. Gotcha. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2012, 4:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847/832 "2012-10-17T16:14:03Z")
> [@Debaser](#): > > Obama didn’t refer to the attacks in question as terrorist attacks. Not during that speech and not for a week and a half afterwards. He unambiguously called it an act of terror the day after it happened. Do you disagree? If so, look at my post above where I explain all about topic sentences. An act of terror is a terrorist attack. Do you disagree? If so, why? He said at the debate he’d called it an act of terror in that speech. Do you disagree? If so, lemme show you the transcript. Romney said he hadn’t. Do you disagree? The moderator corrected Romney. There’s nothing ambiguous in this chain of events. Romney unambiguously screwed up the facts. Now, you might say that Obama should have used that language more, and that’s a legitimate subject of debate: that’s your opinion, to which you’re entitled. The other thing, though, facts–well, it’s well-known whether you’re entitled to your own set of them. ---
**Author:** ![Procrustus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/procrustus/32/2994_2.png) [@Procrustus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Procrustus)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2012, 4:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847/833 "2012-10-17T16:16:43Z")
I’m not sure what the Republicans are trying to insinuate over the Terror/not terror issue. Obama doesn’t look any better if it was “simply” a mob that got out of control. In fact, security efforts would be much more indicted if they were overrun by an “angry mob” instead of a military style attack. Everyone rallies around a president who is in office during a terrorist attack. If Obama was truly playing politics he would have condemned the “act of terror” daily for a few weeks. Instead, “it was clearly a complex attack.” Just like the real world, full of complexity. ---
**Author:** ![SmellMyWort](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ea5d25/32.png) [@SmellMyWort](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SmellMyWort)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2012, 4:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847/834 "2012-10-17T16:17:19Z")
> [@YogSosoth](#): > > I want my binder full of women! Well don’t plan on getting that from Romney. As much as he’d like everyone to believe he was responsible for it, he wasn’t > [@Hampshire](#): > > I found it amusing that when asked how he would differ from Bush that Romney tried to play it off as if the W Bush presidency was a different time, a different era, a different generation, a different set of problems, etc. (4 years ago:rolleyes:) > but when asked how he would get things done he reached back over 20 years and said he’d do things like Reagan:D Back in the good ol’ days when gas was $1.86/gallon :rolleyes: ---
**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, 4:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847/835 "2012-10-17T16:17:32Z")
Think Progress documents 31 Romney “myths” in 41 minutes. [http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2012/10/17/1030581/at-last-nights-debate-romney-told-31-myths-in-41-minutes/?mobile=wp](http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2012/10/17/1030581/at-last-nights-debate-romney-told-31-myths-in-41-minutes/?mobile=wp) Myths is a polite way to say it. And I would argue that they missed some. ---
**Author:** ![yorick73](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/b5a626/32.png) [@yorick73](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yorick73)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2012, 4:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847/836 "2012-10-17T16:17:32Z")
> [@Ibn\_Warraq](#): > > Oh Good Lord, I can’t believe people are trying to rewrite reality so that Mitt wound up not sticking his foot in his mouth when he claimed Obama didn’t label it “an act of terror” for nearly two weeks. I guess CNN was trying to rewrite reality when they published [this](http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/20/world/africa/libya-investigation/index.html) on Sept. 21st? > [@CNN](#): > > The White House, for the first time Thursday, declared the attack that killed Stevens and three other people a terrorist attack. > [@Ibn\_Warraq](#): > > Aside from the fact that he did call it an act of terror the next day, yes, over the next few days the administration when asked if this had been part of a mob action as a result of the Muhammad video or a co-ordinated terrorist act and they said they were investigating. The intelligence community claims that they informed Washington within 24 hours that it was a terrorist attack. Yet, the administration sent Susan Rice out to all the Sunday shows claiming there was no evidence of a “man made disaster”. ---
**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, 4:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847/837 "2012-10-17T16:19:28Z")
> [@Debaser](#): > > Of course it was. Even many Obama supporters acknowledge that Crowley at the vary least overstepped her bounds. It was overwhelmingly biased and that is the whole narrative today, rather than the substance of the debate. How is that not a failure? > > I wouldn’t go so far as calling them “devastating” but I do agree that Obama had a good night and was on top of his game, so you are wrong on this one. > > It’s not as bad as I thought it would be, but overall I’d say he was better than I hoped in some areas and bad in others. I judge him on each issue on the merits. > > I know you wish the few of us that are still here that disagree with you would just leave and have this be another Democratic Underground. Sorry. Not going to happen. Today anyway. That’s a bad response to my post. See how unsatisfying it feels to be told that somethng is “bad” now? It’s just a waste of everyone’s time to tell each other the previous post was “bad.” Hope you can agree that specifying the perceived flaw is more conducive to anything resembling a conversation. ---
**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, 4:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847/838 "2012-10-17T16:19:37Z")
> [@Bosstone](#): > > Most Democrats agreed that Obama lost the first debate. Maybe. I think 30% of so of people in the polls thought he won, and I bet a lot of them were democrats. But I can concede this point for the sake of argument if it makes you happy. > [@](#): > > You said Democrats considered the first debate a tie. You offered a single post to prove this. You seem not to be aware that there can be some Democrats who believe it was a tie without making the first statement wrong. Democrats do not have to agree 100%. Here’s where you go off the rails. I didn’t say that “Democrats considered the first debate a tie.” I said this: “Those of you who thought Obama decisively won: I bet you thought he tied the last one and were surprised by the results.” First of all I’m saying “I bet” clearly indicating it’s an opinion. Secondly, I’m addressing “Those of you” meaning the posters here on the SDMB and not all democrats. Third, I’m not saying all of the posters here think that, just that the ones who’s bias led them to believe that Obama dominated this debate are likely the same ones who were genuinely surprised to see he lost the last one. I posted a link to a thread on the subject to show that such people do exist, and even started a thread about it which is still on page one of the elections forum. Clear now? > [@](#): > > ETA: Are you saying the fact that it was the OP to a thread lends it extra weight? Perhaps I will start a Pit thread shortly. I’m trembling in my boots. ---
**Author:** ![Euphonious\_Polemic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/euphonious_polemic/32/3002_2.png) [@Euphonious\_Polemic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Euphonious_Polemic)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2012, 4:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847/839 "2012-10-17T16:21:03Z")
> [@Debaser](#): > > She interrupted Romney 26 times and Obama only nine times, despite the fact that Obama spoke 9% more and was almost always given the last word. Do ya think that just might have been because Romney was not playing by the rules and NEEDED interrupting? Or in your world, can Romney just do whatever the hell he want’s because… what? Jim Lehrer let him get away with it last time? Because he’s a CEO and therefore the boss? ---
**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, 4:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847/840 "2012-10-17T16:22:00Z")
> [@you\_with\_the\_face](#): > > Am I the only one whose ears homed in on this note of diffidence? My first thought on hearing this was “How are you going to accuse the President of failing to say something appropriately, and not be 100% confident that you’re correct in this characterization? That is not confident leadership. You going to call someone out on someone, be right and _know you’re right._” On this point, I agree completely. Romney’s attack could have been a solid one, but he lacked focus and appeared not to have his facts straight. It was sloppy. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847.md?page=41) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847.md?page=43)