Open thread: The third debate

posted at 8:34 pm on October 22, 2012 by Allahpundit

9 p.m. ET all across the dial except for Fox, which will carry Game 7 of the NLCS. Between that and “Monday Night Football,” it’s a lead-pipe cinch that this will be the lowest-rated of the three debates, especially since people typically don’t vote based on foreign policy anyway. This “Onion” preview of the debate captures the stakes reasonably well, notwithstanding John Kerry’s pre-debate spin that tonight is a “reckoning” for Romney because he’s been, ahem, inconsistent on the issues.

For what it’s worth, I completely agree with Jonah Goldberg:

Foreign policy, the ostensible subject of tonight’s debate, is not as conducive to sweeping statements of ideological principle as domestic policy is these days. Americans are weary of war, wary of the Arab Spring, and fed up with many of the hassles and perceived economic hardships that come with being the leader of the world. By no means do I think Romney should back off principled disagreements with Obama. But the voters Romney needs don’t much care about winning the argument over Libya or the the war on terror generally. They want to hear (or, rather, Romney needs them to hear) why they shouldn’t be worried about Romney being commander-in-chief. That kind of reassurance comes from seeming reasonable above all else. The price for that may be to say “I agree with President Obama” more than I would like and framing things in such a way that Obama is the one who’s forced to seem un-reassuring. To that end, on Libya, like so many other issues, Romney should calmly make his case and let Obama get angry in response.

A little Ron Paul tonight would go a long way. I don’t want to see Romney turn isolationist, but between the Benghazi attack, the rising Islamist tide in Egypt, the maelstrom in Syria, and the decade-long drift in Afghanistan, there are a lot of undecideds out there who might perk up tonight if he signaled that it’s time to pull back a bit from the Middle East. S.E. Cupp gave him the same advice on MSNBC today, encouraging him to critique Obama on drone strikes and the “kill list.” Does Mitt have that in him, though? Many of his foreign-policy advisors are Bush veterans and Romney’s big knock on O in international affairs has always been that you can’t lead from behind. He’s embraced a “peace through strength” message, which means we’re more likely to see marginal disagreements on the hawkish/interventionist end of the spectrum tonight than the starker disputes of the sort you see between them on the economy. For what it’s worth, though:

If he’s going to try to out-interventionist Obama, he’d better come prepared with arguments for why O’s chosen interventions weren’t such hot ideas. Topic A tonight is likely to be Benghazi, with Romney tempted to get down in the weeds about what Obama knew and when. That’ll be difficult: The White House spent the weekend leaking to reporters about the early confusion over what happened at the consulate, with both Obama himself and Susan Rice supposedly being briefed that the attack was spontaneous until 10 days afterward. O wanted that out there so that he could point to those news stories at the debate, of course. (Another pair of leaked stories on Saturday claimed that Al Qaeda had no ties to the attack and also that militants tied to Al Qaeda participated in it.) Team Romney was needling him before the debate this afternoon about the shifting narrative, but that’s not the deeper foreign-policy point here. The deep point is that O (a) undertook a dubious intervention in Libya without congressional approval, (b) failed to anticipate how it would empower Islamists in Africa, including/especially in Mali and Syria, as Qaddafi’s arsenal of weapons like shoulder-fired missiles was expropriated, and (c) then inexplicably left the U.S. ambassador without security, leading to his murder and a new counterterrorism crisis for the U.S. that may end up alienating our new “friends” in Libya once we strike back. More from Danger Room:

But several aspects of his foreign policy have either skirted on the edge of disaster or risk tipping over into them, whether it’s the surge and ensuing the drawdown from Afghanistan; or his inconsistent approach to the Arab Spring, where he’ll intervene in Libya but not Syria. Indeed, Libya looked like the successful ouster of a dictator with no U.S. casualties, but it turned out the U.S. neglected the warning signs of Islamist resurgence in eastern Libya until it murdered four Americans.

Benghazi resonated because it pierced that veneer of competence. It’s reasonable to wonder if there are about to be several Benghazis on Obama’s watch, whether in the form of raided Mideast embassies or Taliban advances or an Iranian nuke. Obama’s most urgent task in this debate is to explain why there won’t be.

That’s Romney’s task tonight. Pierce the veil of competence with which the Foreign Policy President surrounds himself — here’s a good place to start — and leave an impression of competence yourself, especially by having a smart answer ready when Schieffer inevitably asks how your foreign policy differs from Bush’s. (That would make a fine question for President Drone Strike too, needless to say.) Below you’ll find the handy dandy Hot Air/Townhall Twitter widget for live-tweeting. I’ll leave you with this from Walter Russell Mead:

Above all, Governor Romney wants voters coming away from this debate with the impression that he would be a “safe pair of hands.” He’s tough enough to do what’s necessary, but laid-back enough not to do too much. If he’s attacking the President’s policies, it isn’t because he wants to bring Donald Rumsfeld and Richard Cheney back inot the Situation Room. As far as possible, Governor Romney wants to impress voters tonight that a vote for him is a vote for safety, peace and a quiet life. The world is scary enough these days; Americans aren’t looking for a scary President.



Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 38 39 40 41

Jimver, I have a German car and I love it. I have also owned American and loved them too, but this one is my baby.

Philly on October 22, 2012 at 10:51 PM

“I cannot afford another ticket mit mein porsche…”

bofh on October 22, 2012 at 11:24 PM

Seems about right. Not going to move the needle. Mitt seemed a little lackluster, but so did the President. Undecideds don’t care about foreign policy anyway and probably weren’t even watching.

Over under on viewership 40 million?

newtopia on October 22, 2012 at 11:20 PM

I say outside us political junkies who really cared about this FP debate especially with NLCS game 7 and MNF. My husband kept changing between the games while I was watching the “debate.”

Raquel Pinkbullet on October 22, 2012 at 11:24 PM

The lefties are getting increasingly agitated. I saw a difference from the first debate to the second in the Luntz group. Have they started a brawl yet tonight?

txhsmom on October 22, 2012 at 11:17 PM

At least 50/50 it comes to that if they do go back to them. Chairs will be thrown. Shouts of “Jerry! Jerry!” just out of habit.

I’ve seen this frustrated anger from the left increasingly during this past week. They were told that second debate would give their guy a polling bounce, and don’t know how to process the fact that didn’t happen. This is going to be a tense couple of weeks… MSNBC is crazy close to reinstating the old-time practice of smoking on the air.

Gingotts on October 22, 2012 at 11:24 PM

Seriously? You can’t even spell “loser” (once is a typo, twice is ignorance) and you expect your opinion to be taken seriously?

Another product of the Texas public education system.

urban elitist on October 22, 2012 at 10:34 PM

How to determine when you have vanquished the troll: it can’t respond to the fact that Romney handed Obama his arse, so it demonstrates its perceived superiority by criticizing someone’s spelling.

VibrioCocci on October 22, 2012 at 11:24 PM

60%-38% Romney can handle job of C-i-C.

Raquel Pinkbullet on October 22, 2012 at 11:24 PM

I love the fact that Obama just wasted 3 days of his life practicing defending himself on Libya.

kg598301 on October 22, 2012 at 11:25 PM

John the Libertarian on October 22, 2012 at 11:19 PM

I agree with that. He can use it in ads or in speeches, but the world saw it for themselves and that ship sailed. Team Barry got caught lying. Mitt alluded to it in his closing comments by saying his administration would tell the truth. No use in getting into an argument with Barry over the obvious.

I want to see these liars testify under oath in front of Congress. I’m done talking about it.

Philly on October 22, 2012 at 11:25 PM

Ok, is that how Hannity works? Ask questions to someone who has no idea? Asking Sarah what the POTUS promised to Putin is kind of stupid no?

Also…that sequestion WAS McConnell’s backstabbing genius idea.

Can.I.be.in.the.middle on October 22, 2012 at 11:25 PM

Where is Matt Drudge tonight? No new stories up on the site.

Elchasebo on October 22, 2012 at 11:25 PM

Romney was playin’ to not lose. Barry is apparently the challenger now since the Red Debate… Hee.

Illinidiva on October 22, 2012 at 11:25 PM

Romney was masterful in not re-prosecuting Benghazi. Obama has already lost this issue.

John the Libertarian on October 22, 2012 at 11:19 PM

And he can let McCain, Lindsay Graham, Mike Rogers and Issa to pursue them.

bayview on October 22, 2012 at 11:25 PM

Maddow quoting CBS polls … Obama win tonight bigger than Romney’s 1st debate win.

Carnac on October 22, 2012 at 11:22 PM

Doesn’t matter..

Obama was absent in the first debate..

Then Obama was absent as president in the third debate..
He is Toast..

Electrongod on October 22, 2012 at 11:26 PM

The UN Secretary General can’t come from one of the permanent members of the Security Council. If he wants to move to Kenya, he could become SG.

Resist We Much on October 22, 2012 at 10:57 PM

Yeah, and our President can’t be foreign-born. Rules schmules.

Nutstuyu on October 22, 2012 at 11:26 PM

If Mr. Obama were not already President, woud his performance tonight persuade abyone to vote for him? I don’t think so. He seemed to me to be a small, small man.

Sheerq on October 22, 2012 at 11:26 PM

I wish Mitt had practised a bit more. The obvious opening came when Mr. Obama accused Romney of having invested in a Chinese oil company which was evading sanctions and associating with Iran.

Only a few sentences earlier, Obama was crowing about having created a sanctions regime with buyin from Russian — and China.

So, the obvious retort was —

First of all, it was a blind trust — I would not knowingly invest in a company attempting to evade sanctions. That blind trust is just like the pension plan you have, Mr. President, which is also heavily invested in China. China is a major trading partner to the United State, and the only way to get money out of China is to invest in China.

Now, suppose that the Huffington Post talking points are exactly correct and I did — by mistake — invest in such a company. If a company in China is evading sanctions, and you claim to have a good working relationship with the Chinese government, how was that company able to evade your diplomatic initiative? To put it bluntly, your idea of economic sanctions leaks like a sieve — the Chinese have sold armaments to the Iranians, and the Bush Administration applied a great amount of pressure on the Chinese to stop — pressure which is completely lacking from your Administration. Furthermore, you, your Administration, nor anyone else in the Government told me — until tonight — that I might be invested in a company which is a sanctions evader.

That would have put the ball squarely back into Obama’s side of the court with no chance at any result other than hitting it out of bounds. Contriteness at inadvertent sin, pointing out that the President had a few specks in his eye too, and finally saying that the President’s own comments about an effective regime of sanctions against Iran is untruthful at best, and an outright lie at worst — would have gone far.

As it was, the President got in an egregious and unanswered shot.

unclesmrgol on October 22, 2012 at 11:26 PM

Cuda could use some highlights, IMHO.

Philly on October 22, 2012 at 11:26 PM

If Mr. Obama were not already President, would his performance tonight persuade anyone to vote for him? I don’t think so. He seemed to me to be a small, small man.

Sheerq on October 22, 2012 at 11:27 PM

Obama’s unveiled hatred and contempt for his fellow American was glaringly (see what I did there?) un-presidential.

Christien on October 22, 2012 at 11:27 PM

Where is Matt Drudge tonight? No new stories up on the site.

Elchasebo on October 22, 2012 at 11:25 PM

Watching the Cards lose like the rest of the country?

Gingotts on October 22, 2012 at 11:28 PM

If Mr. Obama were not already President, would his performance tonight persuade anyone to vote for him? I don’t think so. He seemed to me to be a small, small man tiny, whiny, petulant CHILD.

Sheerq on October 22, 2012 at 11:27 PM

no CHARGE!

Katfish on October 22, 2012 at 11:29 PM

The dunces are up next.

Philly on October 22, 2012 at 11:29 PM

The reason the leftists on TV are sad is because they know that obama’s only chance was to make Mitt implausible to the electorate, particularly the indies. They know Obama failed miserably and Mitt came off as competent, cool and in control. He is not the war-monger they had hoped for and they know they are in deep trouble.

Ta111 on October 22, 2012 at 11:29 PM

I think tonight gave Team Romney’s Death Star plenty of ammunition…

“… You may fire away, Commander!”

Seven Percent Solution on October 22, 2012 at 11:29 PM

Ok, is that how Hannity works? Ask questions to someone who has no idea?

Can.I.be.in.the.middle on October 22, 2012 at 11:25 PM

Works for MSNBC. Hell, they employ the clueless.

squint on October 22, 2012 at 11:30 PM

Cuda could use some highlights, IMHO.

Philly on October 22, 2012 at 11:26 PM

Naw, she looks great..:)

idesign on October 22, 2012 at 11:31 PM

Little Bammie implied that aircraft carriers and submarines aren’t ‘ships’. Jibberish.

slickwillie2001 on October 22, 2012 at 10:58 PM

Actually, he was lecturing Mr. Romney on what they are — you know — “we have these ships that go under water” and such. It was so obviously talking down that I think the audience got the obvious disrespect in the remark.

unclesmrgol on October 22, 2012 at 11:32 PM

Have not seen MSM fact check Romney auto bankruptcy op ed.

Carnac on October 22, 2012 at 11:32 PM

Elchasebo on October 22, 2012 at 11:25 PM

Prediction: Drudge working on breaking an October surprise.

An Objectivist on October 22, 2012 at 11:33 PM

I wonder how come Romney has never mentioned the Obama administration’s first remarks after moving into the whitehouse that you never let a good crisis go to waste…ie: stimulus boondoggle, gm bailout, dodd-frank, obamacare…need I go on?

rich8450 on October 22, 2012 at 11:33 PM

Is it just me or did obummer have the look of a geeked up meth head?? Those bulging eyes…. scary!

kcd on October 22, 2012 at 11:33 PM

All Romney had to show tonight was that on foreign policy he was “presidential.” Mission accomplished. That Obama felt the need to attack Romney on this or that made him look the “challenger”, thus a lesser on the stage.

It was the night of the great undoing.

TXUS on October 22, 2012 at 11:33 PM

60%-38% Romney can handle job of C-i-C.

Raquel Pinkbullet on October 22, 2012 at 11:24 PM

If Mr. Obama were not already President, woud his performance tonight persuade abyone to vote for him? I don’t think so. He seemed to me to be a small, small man.

Sheerq on October 22, 2012 at 11:26 PM

I think that after tonight, a lot of undecideds watched the better man win again, convincing them to either sit out the election or to secretly vote for Romney w/o feeling bad about it, believing that he couldn’t possibly be as lousy of a President that 0-bow-mao has been.

Anti-Control on October 22, 2012 at 11:33 PM

Palin’s headlights?

faraway on October 22, 2012 at 11:35 PM

Here’s my take:

I think Romney played it safe and didn’t commit any gaffes. I also thought he had the line of the night when he said that we don’t dictate to the world but that we free countries from dictators. I also think Obama looked like he wanted to be somewhere else and that he knows that the election is going to come down to the economy. Romney didn’t do too much but he looked Presidential. I also think for whatever reason that when someone says they are going to support Obama in one of these focus groups that they can’t articulate why they have decided to support Obama. They look dumb compared to the people that can articulate why they are going to vote for Romney. My opinion.

jrfromdallas on October 22, 2012 at 11:35 PM

Carville’s an idiot. The fact that viewership of a debate trends GOP means that Likely Voters will be trending GOP. I guarantee you, four years ago, viewership was more democratic than this year.

JohnGalt23 on October 22, 2012 at 11:36 PM

Have not seen MSM fact check Romney auto bankruptcy op ed.

Carnac on October 22, 2012 at 11:32 PM

I think Chris Wallace did–said Romney had record correct.

INC on October 22, 2012 at 11:36 PM

Luntz didn’t do a very good job vetting this nuts.

1nolibgal on October 22, 2012 at 11:37 PM

Oh my. In Round 2 of Luntz’s focus grouP: Anna Nicole’s look-alike raised her hand on Romney being better at “fixing” the economy. The same one shilling for Obama in the first segment.

conservative pilgrim on October 22, 2012 at 11:37 PM

(CNN) – A CNN/ORC International Poll following Monday’s presidential debate found those who watched the third and final head-to-head matchup of President Barack Obama and Mitt Romney did not identify a clear winner.

Debate viewers split 48% for Obama and 40% for Romney in the poll, a margin within the sampling error of plus or minus 4.5%

VorDaj on October 22, 2012 at 11:37 PM

Romney had a chance at a coup de grace with one withering and dismissive comment (and nothing further said on it) about the Obama Administration’s disastrous handling of the Libya fiasco, but let it slip by in a muddled, unfocused mess of verbiage ~from both sides.

Romney thus didn’t win the debate.

But Obama lied so much during it that once his b.s and prevarications are examined- by even this supine and lickspittle media- any insta-gains for Zero will evaporate.

So a wash.

Meaning, Mittmentum continues and Barack is history.

(And not the kind he likes.)

profitsbeard on October 22, 2012 at 11:38 PM

Fox does not regard themselves as MSM.

Carnac on October 22, 2012 at 11:39 PM

You want an isolationist foreign policy.

No. I want a noninterventionist policy, also known as “strategic disengagement”. We’ve been doing this interventionism thing for the last 70+ years, which is why so few understand that there’s another way of doing things. Read your Jefferson and Washington. “Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none.” “It is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliances with any portion of the foreign world.”
Yes, the world is changing. Yes, there are bad people in the world. However, we’re gradually losing our ability, assuming we ever had it, to control the world. Also, we’re increasingly interdependent in this world. Lastly, we’re broke. Rather than breaching the sovereignty of others in the world, spending countless dollars we don’t have to tell them how they ought now live, hence needlessly pissing off a lot of people, under the auspices of protecting interests other than our own sovereignty, why not pull back our military, throw off the yoke of NATO and other collectivist military treaties (which have only made us and our “allies” weaker), and focus on preserving our sovereignty and trade routes, rebuilding our wealth-producing capacity by encouraging trade, and not allowing ourselves to get dragged into every human interest story on the planet? I have no illusions that this would be a smooth process or that we’d retain all of the influence we have now, but it’s a much more righteous approach, based upon preserving our sovereignty while respecting that of others, and realistic approach, based upon the inevitable decrease in our ability to control the world. Rather than being overwhelmed all at once, why not control our own withdrawal as the world’s policeman?

We can still have Capitalism and a Foreign policy, they are not mutually exclusive.

Agreed. You’d be interested in this, written in 1973.

There is plenty of difference between these 2 candidates.
Corporal Tunnel on October 22, 2012 at 11:06 PM

Categorically or in terms of degree? (Just the same as I asked what the categorical differences were between Obama-McCain, Bush-Kerry, Bush-Gore, Clinton-Dole, Clinton-Bush.) All sought to change the world through power of government, not through free-market capitalism and personal liberty and responsibility. I’d prefer a president who represents the latter, whether you or anyone else thinks he can win or not.

Send_Me on October 22, 2012 at 11:40 PM

Ladies and gentlemen, the President of the United States:

“Bob …….Bob …….Bob …….Bob …….Bob …….Bob …….Bob …….Bob …….Bob …….”

LOL

fogw on October 22, 2012 at 11:16 PM

Bob ‘ra Ann?

cane_loader on October 22, 2012 at 11:41 PM

You’re too stupid to understand. It would be a waste of time.
Jaibones on October 22, 2012 at 11:17 PM

Didn’t Obama use that line tonight? Look, both guys wish to solve all of our problems through the power of government, only to varying degrees. That’s my point.

Send_Me on October 22, 2012 at 11:43 PM

Is it just me or did obummer have the look of a geeked up meth head?? Those bulging eyes…. scary!

kcd on October 22, 2012 at 11:33 PM

Cocaine, not meth.

slickwillie2001 on October 22, 2012 at 11:44 PM

OscartheGrouch ‏@CookieMonster

SesameStreetPolling post-debate Big Bird devotees only key stat: “More/less likely to vote after debate” – Obama 99 more/1 less. Romney 0 more/100 less.

Resist We Much on October 22, 2012 at 11:44 PM

Cuda could use some highlights, IMHO.

Philly on October 22, 2012 at 11:26 PM

Naw, she looks great..:)

idesign on October 22, 2012 at 11:31 PM

…I couldn’t see what was at the end of her necklace! (:-<)

KOOLAID2 on October 22, 2012 at 11:45 PM

Have not seen MSM fact check Romney auto bankruptcy op ed.

Carnac on October 22, 2012 at 11:32 PM

Romney was correct. Obama lied.

Here’s the op-ed:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/19/opinion/19romney.html

See the second-to-last paragraph.

Resist We Much on October 22, 2012 at 11:46 PM

PPP post-debate INDYs only key stat: “More/less likely to vote after debate” – Obama 32 more/48 less. Romney 47 more/35 less.
11:36pm – 22 Oct 12

Bye bye Obama

Conservative4ev on October 22, 2012 at 11:47 PM

My thoughts on Romney not going more forcefully after O on Libya is he is sensitive to charges of “politicizing” the deaths of our citizens. A fine line to walk. I think he may have handled it very well.

tj4osu on October 22, 2012 at 11:48 PM

Serioulsy…I never thought I would be posting a link like this to show my point

http://i.imgur.com/sk1v7.jpg

that’s all I kept asking during the debate

Can.I.be.in.the.middle on October 22, 2012 at 11:48 PM

THE GIANTS WIN THE PENNANT! THE GIANTS WIN THE PENNANT! THE GIANTS WIN THE PENNANT!

The War Planner on October 22, 2012 at 11:46 PM

…I wanted to play the Cards again!

KOOLAID2 on October 22, 2012 at 11:48 PM

Can.I.be.in.the.middle on October 22, 2012 at 11:48 PM

+1

Send_Me on October 22, 2012 at 11:51 PM

THE GIANTS WIN THE PENNANT! THE GIANTS WIN THE PENNANT! THE GIANTS WIN THE PENNANT!

The War Planner on October 22, 2012 at 11:46 PM

Sad face…

We will pwn you in 2013…

eyesky on October 22, 2012 at 11:52 PM

Mary Katharine Ham @mkhammer
RT @ppppolls: Swing state voters say Obama won the debate 53-42, and are planning to vote for him 51-45

gumbyandpokey on October 22, 2012 at 11:09 PM

Yes because EVERYONE KNOWS this is a Foreign Policy Election…LOL

Romney had two goals tonight…
1. You’re in the lead, DON’T F’ it up
2. Appear “Presidential” and come off as a competent “CinC”

That is ALL he had to do to maintain his growing lead.

He achieved both goals.

Obama needed a BIG mistake by Romney…he didn’t get it (try as he did to be snarky and goad Mitt into one) and to position Romney as Bush v2.0 and he failed to do that…
Two weeks left… :)

Strike Hornet on October 22, 2012 at 11:52 PM

As per CNN: Who did this debate make you more likely to vote for?

Liar in Chief 24%

Mitt 25%

Pour it on, Team Mitt.

JohnGalt23 on October 22, 2012 at 11:54 PM

Mary Katharine Ham @mkhammer
RT @ppppolls: Swing state voters say Obama won the debate 53-42, and are planning to vote for him 51-45

gumbyandpokey on October 22, 2012 at 11:09 PM

Yes because EVERYONE KNOWS this is a Foreign Policy Election…LOL

Romney had two goals tonight…
1. You’re in the lead, DON’T F’ it up
2. Appear “Presidential” and come off as a competent “CinC”

That is ALL he had to do to maintain his growing lead.

He achieved both goals.

Obama needed a BIG mistake by Romney…he didn’t get it (try as he did to be snarky and goad Mitt into one) and to position Romney as Bush v2.0 and he failed to do that…
Two weeks left… :)

Strike Hornet on October 22, 2012 at 11:52 PM

Obama might have won the battle, but Romney is going to win the war

PPP post-debate INDYs only key stat: “More/less likely to vote after debate” – Obama 32 more/48 less. Romney 47 more/35 less.
11:36pm – 22 Oct 12

Bye bye Obama

Conservative4ev on October 22, 2012 at 11:47 PM

Conservative4ev on October 22, 2012 at 11:54 PM

Serioulsy…I never thought I would be posting a link like this to show my point

http://i.imgur.com/sk1v7.jpg

that’s all I kept asking during the debate

Can.I.be.in.the.middle on October 22, 2012 at 11:48 PM

Seriously, I always thought your comments sounded “exactly” like this. Self-destructive and defeating. Unless you’re planning on voting for the other guy?

hawkdriver on October 22, 2012 at 11:56 PM

-1. BS. The same Glenn Beck that says vote Mitt he’s not a commie?

Not very practical to be slamming Mitt 2 weeks out, unless you want 4 MORE YEARS of the dog eater.

wolly4321 on October 23, 2012 at 12:00 AM

Another product of the Texas public education system.

urban elitist on October 22, 2012 at 10:34 PM

You mean like my son who is graduating with above a 4.0 and a year worth of college courses, ready to be snatched up for a full ride at just about any college he wants to go to?

You progressives love to classify people from the south as stupid and uneducated because that’s all you have, pathetic attacks and feeble projection.

I’ll take my son’s non-union teacher education over your urban elite union based horse manure any day.

By the way, you reek of desperation.

ShadowsPawn on October 23, 2012 at 12:01 AM

hawkdriver on October 22, 2012 at 11:56 PM

What have the Republicans and Democrats done to convince you that you can only vote for them? How is voting for a candidate who espouses what you believe “self-destructive and defeating”? Voting for the lesser of two evils always has the same result, whereas voting based upon principle moreover another man’s idea of pragmatism at least gives one a fighting chance for something better.

Send_Me on October 23, 2012 at 12:01 AM

Send_Me on October 23, 2012 at 12:01 AM

SO……….trot us out a 3rd choice that has more than 1% of a chance to WIN………….

Katfish on October 23, 2012 at 12:05 AM

Gary johnson or ron paul are out dude. Get over it. It’s over. Your principaled stance opens the door to 4 more years of disaster.

wolly4321 on October 23, 2012 at 12:12 AM

Is everyone watching the same debate I am?

Romney inialated Obama

He was presidential and knowledible,
People will see him as a competant commander in chief

They made have had similar plans on some issues
What are you supposed to do?
Come up with an irrational policy just to be different

Obama was petty, condescending and defensive.
When he couldn’t find a worn out talking point He wandered aimlessly looking for a vital point

Smark to not dwell on bengazi
The media will bring up there shock over it
His ads on the timeline will show without opposition

Let sununu tear into soledad

audiotom on October 23, 2012 at 12:12 AM

hawkdriver on October 22, 2012 at 11:56 PM

What have the Republicans and Democrats done to convince you that you can only vote for them? How is voting for a candidate who espouses what you believe “self-destructive and defeating”? Voting for the lesser of two evils always has the same result, whereas voting based upon principle moreover another man’s idea of pragmatism at least gives one a fighting chance for something better.

Send_Me on October 23, 2012 at 12:01 AM

I’m a Conservative Party member. I’m voting for Mitt Romney the Republican. I’m not throwing my vote away on some idiotic third-party no-name that has even less in common with me than a major party candidate.

You go ahead though.

hawkdriver on October 23, 2012 at 12:14 AM

-1. BS. The same Glenn Beck that says vote Mitt he’s not a commie?

Not very practical to be slamming Mitt 2 weeks out, unless you want 4 MORE YEARS of the dog eater.

wolly4321 on October 23, 2012 at 12:00 AM

Glenn Beck only sees Romney’s religion is blind to anything Romney did in his life except join Becks Church.

Sorry I am a Conservative and Romney is a Communist he actually was taught it by the master Saul Alinsky.

Besides that he denied he was a Republican in 2002. I do not vote for fake Republicans that are really Democrats ever.

Let Mitt walk over to the other Isle and work with the Democrats as he said once again tonight. He will have to do so without my vote.

Steveangell on October 23, 2012 at 12:15 AM

audiotom on October 23, 2012 at 12:12 AM

I watched it, I agree somewhat wi you, I believe Romney had a mission and accomplished it. The media wanted Romney to get in the gutter so they can rape him with it, he didn’t bite on it. All Mitt had to do was show he was presidential and can be CIC. He did that hands down.

Conservative4ev on October 23, 2012 at 12:15 AM

Sorry I am a Conservative and Romney is a Communist he actually was taught it by the master Saul Alinsky.

ROTFLMMFAO!

Resist We Much on October 23, 2012 at 12:17 AM

Sorry I am a Conservative and Romney is a Communist he actually was taught it by the master Saul Alinsky.

Steveangell on October 23, 2012 at 12:15 AM

Have you suffered a recent head injury?

Seriously.

db on October 23, 2012 at 12:21 AM

Sorry I am a Conservative and Romney is a Communist he actually was taught it by the master Saul Alinsky.

ROTFLMMFAO!

Resist We Much on October 23, 2012 at 12:17 AM

Fine here is the proof.

Mitt was his fathers Spokesman during this time. He was involved with his fathers campaigns from a very young age.

Steveangell on October 23, 2012 at 12:21 AM

Steveangell on October 23, 2012 at 12:21 AM

He’s not a Communist…anymore than David Horowitz is.

Resist We Much on October 23, 2012 at 12:23 AM

From two very different perspectives as to why voting for the lesser of two evils is short-sighted and always results in “evil”:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0rScPlpBBIA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ylv7GqkKyM4

But hey, if you like Obama or Romney, then vote for one of them. I don’t care. I only ask that folks vote based upon principle.

Send_Me on October 23, 2012 at 12:26 AM

Have not seen MSM fact check Romney auto bankruptcy op ed.

Carnac on October 22, 2012 at 11:32 PM

I think Chris Wallace did–said Romney had record correct.

INC on October 22, 2012 at 11:36 PM

Romney even brought up Bush and said he did not agree with how Bush
started the bailouts – all the libs just exploded I think….

redguy on October 23, 2012 at 12:32 AM

Sorry I am a Conservative and Romney is a Communist he actually was taught it by the master Saul Alinsky.

Steveangell on October 23, 2012 at 12:15 AM

Sorry I am a Conservative and Obama is a Communist who was actually was taught it by the master Saul Alinsky. Hillary even wrote her thesis about Alinsky….

redguy on October 23, 2012 at 12:33 AM

Send_Me on October 23, 2012 at 12:26 AM

So, who ARE you voting for (I haven’t read all of the previous posts, so I might have missed it)?

Moose Drool on October 23, 2012 at 12:34 AM

Fine here is the proof.

Mitt was his fathers Spokesman during this time. He was involved with his fathers campaigns from a very young age.

Steveangell on October 23, 2012 at 12:21 AM

Your proof is nonsensical as was your premise that Mitt is communist. Now, go back to Kos (you’re no conservative) and get some help, pronto.

Slainte on October 23, 2012 at 12:38 AM

Mitt was in France at the time. For 30 months.

Want to change your bullshit story?

db on October 23, 2012 at 12:38 AM

Good Morning to all my fair weather buds, you know who you are :-)

I watched the debate, was gonna comment but this thread was flying!

WE WON/WE WIN!! A supreme night all round!! Glorious!!

Was not well, am better now…

Thank you all for your concerns!!!

My PC caught a nasty virus, been in the shop getting fixed!

Catch you all later…

The Louse in da House is History!!!!!

Scrumpy on October 23, 2012 at 12:39 AM

I didn’t like how moderate Romney came across, but then again, he doesn’t need to win my vote. He needs to convince the idiots who are somehow undecided less than a month before an election between a successful businessman and a failed Marxist.

P.S. – Is Debbie Wasserman Schultz partially deaf or something? Just curious about that shtrange speech pattern of hers.

Sign of the Dollar on October 23, 2012 at 12:40 AM

Scrumpy on October 23, 2012 at 12:39 AM

SCRUMPY! WE’VE MISSED YOU! STOP BY THE QOTD WHEN YOU CAN. I HOPE YOU’RE WELL!:)

thatsafactjack on October 23, 2012 at 12:44 AM

Steveangell on October 23, 2012 at 12:15 AM

Aren’t you the guy that insinuated that Romney was the anti-christ or something back in September? Glad to see your opinion of the man has grown so much in the past month. 9_9;;

WolvenOne on October 23, 2012 at 12:45 AM

We don’t dictate

We free countries from dictators

Bambi was sticking his finger out, trying to get a time out

audiotom on October 23, 2012 at 12:46 AM

Heh, Mr. FP??

http://youtu.be/xMgF6TAI9Y0

redguy on October 23, 2012 at 12:49 AM

If Obama is saying “Sequestration will not happen”
- isn’t that more the language of a dictator?

Didn’t Obama force Sequestration because he could not compromise on the budget??
Now he says it won’t happen???

Hmmmm, Obama’s last ditch political play???

redguy on October 23, 2012 at 12:53 AM

So, who ARE you voting for (I haven’t read all of the previous posts, so I might have missed it)?
Moose Drool on October 23, 2012 at 12:34 AM

I do not wish to sound rude, but it shouldn’t matter. I’m merely encouraging folks to vote for the candidate who best represents what they believe. As an alternative to an R or D, one can choose Gary Johnson as a libertarian. Virgil Goode for the Constitution Party. CPUSA has a candidate I’m sure. Voters really ought to pressure their legislators to push for a preferential voting system, allowing voters to rank order the candidates, but that’s another topic.

Send_Me on October 23, 2012 at 12:54 AM

redguy on October 23, 2012 at 12:53 AM

They’re already trying to walk that one back actually, gonna hurt him in the next few days. XD

WolvenOne on October 23, 2012 at 12:54 AM

Your proof is nonsensical as was your premise that Mitt is communist. Now, go back to Kos (you’re no conservative) and get some help, pronto.

Slainte on October 23, 2012 at 12:38 AM

Far more likely you came from there.

I know the fact that his father praised Saul Alinsky while Mitt was his Spokesman means nothing.

Meanwhile there is no proof Obama ever knew Saul Alinsky but plenty of proof that his family was communist. Yes both are communist. His father also praised the USSR and North Vietnam while claiming the USA was brainwashing people. Sounds much like Obama.

Steveangell on October 23, 2012 at 12:57 AM

while Mitt was his Spokesman

Steveangell on October 23, 2012 at 12:57 AM

You didn’t see my last post, did you?

I will repeat:

Mitt was in France at the time. For 30 months.

db on October 23, 2012 at 1:15 AM

Loved seeing Professor Romney taking Obama to bidness school!

Sherman1864 on October 23, 2012 at 1:16 AM

The big deal is the post debate. Romney has the soundbites and ad material. Obama doesn’t have nothing from this debate. Nothing memorable or commercial worthy. He’s done.

milemarker2020 on October 22, 2012 at 11:23 PM

Does Obama even have enough cash to buy anymore ad time? Last I heard, the Dems were taking out a loan!

Sign of the Dollar on October 23, 2012 at 1:21 AM

Nine comments away from 4000.

thatsafactjack on October 23, 2012 at 1:21 AM

Charles Krauthammer “Romney Won” .

thatsafactjack on October 23, 2012 at 1:26 AM

à votre santé!! :)

jimver on October 23, 2012 at 1:35 AM

Romney even brought up Bush and said he did not agree with how Bush
started the bailouts – all the libs just exploded I think….

redguy on October 23, 2012 at 12:32 AM

Bailouts were started by Soros and Bernanke colluding on the scheme. Soros got the scheme going by withdrawing $500 Million in CASH from Fed in Atlanta, that’s when Bernanke took his cue to talk Bush II into a bailout. Not just Bush, but most other GOP Senators as well, McLaim being the best known case.

Old news by now, but I do agree with Romney that we should never have allowed the bailouts. Too bad McLaim had to interject his campaign and financial acumen into this.

riddick on October 23, 2012 at 1:38 AM

Obama doesn’t have nothing from this debate. Nothing memorable or commercial worthy. He’s done.

milemarker2020 on October 22, 2012 at 11:23 PM

Hussein got HORSES. A pretty erroneous statement, actually, since we’re still in Afghanistan.

riddick on October 23, 2012 at 1:40 AM

thatsafactjack on October 23, 2012 at 1:26 AM

Thanks for the link.

gh on October 23, 2012 at 1:41 AM

Cuda could use some highlights, IMHO.

Philly on October 22, 2012 at 11:26 PM

I think the lipgloss was a poor choice. She looked like she’d just walked through a “Hollywood makeover” machine. She’s more beautiful with less makeup and her natural hair color.

I just can’t get over that feral Luntz group that was obviously peppered with vocal, decided voters. I thought for sure someone was going to throw his or her shoe at someone in another row.

gatsbysgirlontheside on October 23, 2012 at 1:42 AM

The Louse in da House is History!!!!!

Scrumpy on October 23, 2012 at 12:39 AM

.
Wow, and here I thought you were just imaginary …

… but you do exist!

Excuse me, I’m going off to look for Santa.

;->

PolAgnostic on October 23, 2012 at 1:42 AM

Comment pages: 1 38 39 40 41