2012 Presidential Debate in 100 Seconds: The Mile High Debate
Needs Plugin: Flash |
Not Working?
The 1st of the 2012 Presidential Debate series between President Barack Obama and Governor Mitt Romney, condensed into 100 seconds.
Oct 3, 2012 9:07 PM
Re: 2012 Presidential Debate in 100 Seconds: The Mile High Debate
Mitt rhymes with sh**. Shouldn't that be clue enough who to vote for?
By: Boglin
Re: 2012 Presidential Debate in 100 Seconds: The Mile High Debate
An interesting thing about reporting of results of that debate: UK news clearly stated that Obama lost the debate, Canada news generally said that Obama struggled badly, and US news described the debate as sparring. To me, it looked like Obama felt in his heart that he had performed below expectations these past years and showed up at the debate for his whoopin'.
By: Opetaja
Re: 2012 Presidential Debate in 100 Seconds: The Mile High Debate
'US news described the debate as sparring'
What are you talking about? His performance was widely criticized in the U.S. media.
I'm not going to apologize for Obama's failings, but he lost the debate because Romney made all kinds of fibs and he didn't call him out on them. Also, for being a great orator, he should have been able to put together a coherent closing statement.
What are you talking about? His performance was widely criticized in the U.S. media.
I'm not going to apologize for Obama's failings, but he lost the debate because Romney made all kinds of fibs and he didn't call him out on them. Also, for being a great orator, he should have been able to put together a coherent closing statement.
By: the_monk
Re: 2012 Presidential Debate in 100 Seconds: The Mile High Debate
So when was Obama a great orator? When he had a teleprompter in front of his face?
The guy rose to fame using the blindness of the masses and the money of the influential; and if you look closely, you can see he shrugged into a sort of baptist-preach style and grew that way. It was all acting and fun to him. Romney is the same. Depends on the audience who they'll be. Both aren't particularly good at it, but that may be my bias. You can quite readily see when someone is lying and both are lying through their teeth all the time. They represent their corporate masters and perhaps, just perhaps Obama has enough of that. He hung his head in shame, perhaps. The guy is a loser of the first order. No amount of money or fame can make you a winner. Those arsewipes stand for lies and deceit and personal self-gain.
The guy rose to fame using the blindness of the masses and the money of the influential; and if you look closely, you can see he shrugged into a sort of baptist-preach style and grew that way. It was all acting and fun to him. Romney is the same. Depends on the audience who they'll be. Both aren't particularly good at it, but that may be my bias. You can quite readily see when someone is lying and both are lying through their teeth all the time. They represent their corporate masters and perhaps, just perhaps Obama has enough of that. He hung his head in shame, perhaps. The guy is a loser of the first order. No amount of money or fame can make you a winner. Those arsewipes stand for lies and deceit and personal self-gain.
Re: 2012 Presidential Debate in 100 Seconds: The Mile High Debate
The NY Times used the word 'sparring'. USA Today used similar language.
By: Opetaja
