Obama v. Romney: Debate Round 3. Live Commentary and Heckling Official Thread.

Who Won Debate Number Three?


  • Total voters
    56
Yeah, I don't like Obama's policies but personally he seems like a fairly decent guy, at least if you don't count "Political" things in your assessment (And if you do I think there are very, very few politicians who don't deserve personal hatred as well:p)
On a personal level, I have a lot more in common with Obama, and would like to listen to some Grateful Dead shows with him.
 
A little bit. Obama threw it at Mittens to show how bad at foreign policy he is.

Obama was crushed on this topic. Not only was Obama caught lying about what Romney said, Romney showed he understands that there are different threats in different spheres of foreign policy. Apparently Obama thinks myopically on this topic.

Russia was described as a geopolitical foe (ie someone who competes with us globally in myriad ways) and terrorism and a nuclear Iran as national security threats (people who may/are actually try to physically harm us).

Russia is not our friend, they are not our enemy, they are our competitor. Recognizing this is essential. Denying it is dillussional. Obama prefers the later, and his "reset" obviously failed at every level.

In what way does he not project extreme chickenhawkitis?

Probably when he never once advocated for violence in any form and constantly talked about avoiding it?

That would be opposed to our current president with no knowledge or experience with the military trying to pretend his is a SEAL bragging about killing people. You know, the very definition of a chicken hawk.
 
Obama was crushed? The rate things were going, if the debate had lasted five more minutes, Mittens would have endorsed the President.
 
Obama lost the military last night with the Russia failure and the Navy comments, that loses him VA, FL and probably Nevada. NC was a long shot before, it is an impossibility now.

I don't mind cutting the military, I think Romney is wrong for not cutting it (while Obama wants to cut it to much). However, for a sitting president who was involved with major naval procurement decisions like the DDG 1000 and LCS to be ignorant of (or deny) that we have a major shortfall in naval construction is simply inexcusable.
 
If you think our Navy is only concerned with other navies, I guess you are as knowledgable about the topic as Obama. Ie not.
 
Obama lost the military last night with the Russia failure and the Navy comments, that loses him VA, FL and probably Nevada. NC was a long shot before, it is an impossibility now.

I don't mind cutting the military, I think Romney is wrong for not cutting it (while Obama wants to cut it to much). However, for a sitting president who was involved with major naval procurement decisions like the DDG 1000 and LCS to be ignorant of (or deny) that we have a major shortfall in naval construction is simply inexcusable.

How much is Obama wanting to cut it?

I think we could probably cut it by half and still be perfectly safe for defense. Very few of the cuts (Possibly none, I don't know how much of our military funding is for defense and how much is for "Defense") would actually cut actual defense, it would be more sending all of our troops home (Yes, all of them, no more European bases, no more South Korean basis, pull out of Afghanistan, Iraq, exc.) and possibly some cuts on excess support for our nuclear program (We have enough to destroy the world five freaking times... not needed IMO.)
 
Obama wants to cut it less than the sequester cuts. If "the military" wants to vote for Romney because of that, it would be hard to find a bloc of voters more out of touch with their own interests.
 
If you think our Navy is only concerned with other navies, I guess you are as knowledgable about the topic as Obama. Ie not.
Ok - more broadly - what threat requires even bigger military bloat? You guys planning to get strung out another decade by third world dead enders?
 
Like I told you, I want to cut the military.

Obama claimed flately that Romney was asking for ships the Navy didn't want. That the Navy didn't have a shortfall because something about bayonnets. The problem with that is the 300 ship Navy is currrent policy, policy released by Obama's administration. They have a ship building goal, approved by him, and they are not meeting it.

If Obama didn't want that to be the Navy's policy he should have changed it. If he decided to change his mind for the sake of a zinger so be it, but the voters in Hampton Roads, NOVA and Jacksonville amongst others will have something to say about that, and Obama is still wrong in regards to reality at the time of the debate.
 
Mitt has said that as president he will create 12MM new jobs.

He has also said that the government does not create jobs. I'm not sure how he will reconcile these positions. As president he would be acting as the government. Maybe I'm missing something. ;)
 
Back
Top Bottom