The First Presidential Debate
http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2012-10-04/first-presidential-debate
The first presidential debate was held last night in Denver. Diane and her guests discuss what they said, who came out ahead, and where the candidates go from here.
Guests
E.J. Dionne Jr.
senior fellow, The Brookings Institution, columnist, Washington Post and author of "Our Divided Political Heart: The Battle for the American Idea in an Age of Discontent."
Ramesh Ponnuru
senior editor for the "National Review."
Susan Page
Washington bureau chief for USA Today.
Comments
Please familiarize yourself with our Code of Conduct and Terms of Use before posting your comments.
Silota wrote:
If Diane goes off the air, where will you make your comments? I am sure that PBS will go the route of others and have to have advertising, which they will succeed in getting. Why make comments like this? Is this helpful, useful? civil?? Not really.
Those business promo's are ads. Sirius/XM radio does rather well with people buying subscriptions. There are many places to make comments already. I do not want to have my money extracted by taxation to pay for anything not explicitly written in the Constitution.
Romney's greatest talent--and his greatest failing--is that he will deliver any message he thinks will work depending on the audience.
I think Obama was, is, and always will be nothing but consistent.
It may well be that the President used this debate as a chance to set the stage for the next two, but I was concerned there seemed to be no "fire" in him at this first go-round. Wherever President Obama goes on his campaign trail he ask the attendees and prospective voters/supporters, "are your fired up?". I'm turning that question back to the President and hoping for the same response he hopes for when he asks the question. I want and need him to show me how much he wants to win this campaign.
E. J. Dionne is spinning like the Tasmanian Devil in his vain attempt to rehabilitate Obama and deride Romney.
I'm surprised that there seems to be a consensus among pundits this morning that Romney "won" the debate. I am an Obama supporter and I doubt that my mind would have been changed by what was said by the candidates. I know body language is not as important as substance in a debate, but Romney addressed most of his comments to the President, while Obama spoke to the camera, that is, to the viewing audience. Romney seemed angry to me and appeared to be the underdog. My fear is that Obama's handlers will tell him to go out swinging in the next debate. The President should remain presidential throughout the campaign.
Personally I do not feel President Obama gave many real specifics. His statements were wordy and without much of his principle. People are easily swayed but someone who tells them what they want to hear which is what Obama does. I really cannot believe that people think we are going to support our spending by taxing the rich! Support our big Obama created government programs! Don't we want an American populace responsible for themselves? If you want a country where all have a responsibility you had better vote for Romney. If you believe in the myth that the rich can pay for the growing welfare of this country the O man is yours and so is will be the monkey on your back when we are in the same position as Spain, Greece.
The left is out in force today, no surprise, trying to shore up this failed President. Of course the abdication of personal responsibility is still present, however. I heard one person this morning trying to defend Mr. Obama by saying it was Jim Lehrer's fault! Leher did a poor job, but the President was not up to the job. Romney was. Mr. Obama was simply poorly prepared, has no record to talk about, and was badly outmatched by the Governor last night.Republicans should not rest on their laurels, however. I think Mr. Obama will be better prepared for the next two. Given all that, however, I'll agree with this one statement ....
JanB wrote:
"I also think Mr. Lehrer did not do a good job by losing control of the debate."
Trust me, Jim Lehrer has hosted his last debate.
mollyt wrote:
"Did anyone catch the Romney gaff at the end, in which he says he's quoting the Constitution. He specifies "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." That is from the Declaration of Independence.
It would be nice if our politicians knew the difference."
---------------------------
Apparently it is you who missed Romney referring to both the Constitution and The Declaration of Independence. It would be nice if people who viewed the debate actually watched it.
Mr Romney was slick. He was the perfect salesman. He had clever, punchy language. He was extremely aggressive. He was the winner in the STYLE category.
President Obama was level-headed. He was consistent. He was extremely thorough and analytical. He was unflappable. AND he was ACCURATE. By contrast, he was the winner in the SUBSTANCE category.
E.J. Dionne is so in the tank for Obama. It is difficult to take seriously any so-called analysis that he offers. And his comment to the other panelist about her not liking the facts the fact checkers give because she's a "good conservative" was beyond snarky. It was a rude insult. Not because being conservative is bad, but because E.J. intended the comment to be an insult as if he believes conservatives don't deal in facts. Yes, E.J. Dionne I'm reading your book "Why Americans Hate Politics" and now I know to read with an eye on your bias'.
Maybe I have a strange view, but I think the president's performance at the debate last night highlights a very good quality of his- that he wants people to make their choices based on facts, rather than being drawn in by the showbiz of a good fight.
Perfect!
@bethpuch-Perfect!
Michael Gregory wrote:
"President Obama was level-headed. He was consistent. He was extremely thorough and analytical. He was unflappable. AND he was ACCURATE. By contrast, he was the winner in the SUBSTANCE category."
---------------------------------
Since when is unflappable employing a smirk and looking away whenever Romney was speaking? Substance? Obama just coninued to recite his handlers David Axelrod and Valerie Jerrett talking points.
carla wrote:
"Maybe I have a strange view, but I think the president's performance at the debate last night highlights a very good quality of his- that he wants people to make their choices based on facts, rather than being drawn in by the showbiz of a good fight."
----------------------------
Sure. Obama expects his showbiz friends in Hollywood to lay on the illusion that he is a substantive President. You actually believe Obama is about anything other than winning a 2nd term at any cost? Where have you been?
@remmel,
That might be a consideration if Obama had not already experienced several debates with white men/women, and if he had not already served almost four years as the leader of the free world. I can't see any scenario where Obama would feel the need to express a submissive demeanor to anyone at this point in his career. And, if he does feel that need, then he is in need of psychological treatment and unfit to be the president.
Interesting Behavior observation: When post debate greetings were drawing to a close for last evenings' debate, Gov. Romney went to the podium to collect his belongings. Pres Obama left the stage and an unidentified aid was sent back to the podium to pick up after Pres Obama.
Please discuss this telling behavior.
Thanks,
I was never a debater; however, how is it that constant interruption and aggression constitute positive attributes for a presidential candidate? Romney reinforced his image as an arrogant, verbal bully who will say whatever he feels is needed at any time. There were no thoughtful pauses for Romney. He seemed to simply regurgitate script. I guess what I got from the debate is that rather than present the details that everyone wants to see, Romney played a game that he enjoys. He would have impressed me if he had presented substantive information. He certainly had time to prepare information; however, it would seem that he prepped for the debates as if for a sporting event rather than for thoughtful, informative discourse.
I was never a debater; however, how is it that constant interruption and aggression constitute positive attributes for a presidential candidate? Romney reinforced his image as an arrogant, verbal bully who will say whatever he feels is needed at any time. There were no thoughtful pauses for Romney. He seemed to simply regurgitate script. I guess what I got from the debate is that rather than present the details that everyone wants to see, Romney played a game that he enjoys. He would have impressed me if he had presented substantive information. He certainly had time to prepare information; however, it would seem that he prepped for the debates as if for a sporting event rather than for thoughtful, informative discourse.
I was never a debater; however, how is it that constant interruption and aggression constitute positive attributes for a presidential candidate? Romney reinforced his image as an arrogant, verbal bully who will say whatever he feels is needed at any time. There were no thoughtful pauses for Romney. He seemed to simply regurgitate script. I guess what I got from the debate is that rather than present the details that everyone wants to see, Romney played a game that he enjoys. He would have impressed me if he had presented substantive information. He certainly had time to prepare information; however, it would seem that he prepped for the debates as if for a sporting event rather than for thoughtful, informative discourse.
Bill Maher, who gave Obama's re-election campaign $1 million, actually tweeted this after the debate:
“Obama made a lot of great points tonight. Unfortunately, most of them were for Romney.”
“I can’t believe I’m saying this, but Obama looks like he DOES need a teleprompter.”
As I watched the debates with family in Colorado all Dems all four of us kept saying whoa Obama is blowing it Romney is clear, concise etc. Not one of us would ever vote for Obama but being honest about the debates. One thing that was also being repeated at least by three of us was that they were both being extraordinary gentleman and we were proud of that. Two obviously incredibly intelligent and competent individuals discussing the State of the Union in a respectful manner. A huge thank you to both of them. But who would have expected anything different!
But the President was just not himself last night. Made me wonder was he sick, on medication? Something else serious bothering him. When have we ever seen him perform so poorly. Really not like him.
Understood why he did not want to harp on the 47% opportunity but he really did not defend his policies. And did not make it clear why not making excuses that Republicans had blocked him all of the way...from the beginning they had that plan.
President Obama clearly has to pick up his game.
Romney lied really well about the 5 trillion issue. He turned his face and ears towards Obama for every comment of President Obama's. I noticed this about Romney during all of the Republican debates. He actually seems to listen. Thought Obama could have used more of this respectful type of listening. One comment of Romney's that I thought all stops should be pulled out (hope the Dems make ads) was when Romney referred to all people on medicaid as the "poor" So he thinks that many of our seniors, vets in nursing homes who ended up in nursing homes and went through their savings being there and then end up going on partial medicaid payments are the "poor" Perfect for an ad talking with seniors in nursing homes who are in this for many of them embarrassing predicament.
Hopefully President OBama picks up his game.
I am Obama supporter.
I am angry/disappointed with the strategy the democrats used for the debate.
The USA wants winners and when you have someone down, you have to take them out. Taking the "high road" only served to energize the Romney camp when their morale was down.
Time to play offense
will be the monkey on your back when we are in the same position as Spain, Greece.
Lets get the facts straight. Greece fell because people were perceived as failures if they paid any taxes. It was a national obsession to pay as little in taxes as possible, and game the system as much as possible. Does this sound familiar?
I haven't seen any commentary on what I thought was an important statement by Romney. I can't quote it exactly, but he said, on (discretionary) expenses he would apply a test, something like "is this worth borrowing from China to pay for," and then he said directly to Jim Lehrer that spending on NPR would not pass his test. So it sounds to me like he is getting ready to jettison a whole slew of domestic discretionary programs. While I have always felt that the Federal government shouldn't be building local museums and the like, without further definition and specifics, we shouldn't be surprised if "President Romney" cancels your local housing program, your local re-training programs, your local public transportation infrastructure programs [in Houston, read "light rail"], and the like which have been funded by Federal revenues. Not being an expert on these things, I'm sure there is a much longer list.
kathleen wrote:
"But the President was just not himself last night. Made me wonder was he sick, on medication?
----------------------
Nope. This is what you get sans Teleprompter.
Romney 1, Obama 0........more to come!
Mike Sergeant wrote:
"Greece fell because people were perceived as failures if they paid any taxes."
Only a small part of the story. Greece fell because it was profligate and because it no longer had a sovereign currency. This is the same reason that states are failing - because they can't print their own money - they can only borrow from somebody because they can't make the currency they use float.
The US can still do that, but every dollar you have still has a relative value against every other dollar and against every other currency. Which is why, though we have much more control than Greece, Uncle Ben is inflating our currency terribly. But it's the "stealth" inflation that doesn't show up in the inflation numbers. Prices don't go up in the market basket of goods used to measure inflation, but food and energy do and they are perhaps most important to the average family.
We are behind Greece, but not as far behind as many people think. Our leaders have made promises they can't really keep. In order to keep them you print money and buy debt. It's called "monetizing the debt", and, if you study history, you know that monetizing the debt is what countries do before they go bk. The dollar is still the world currency of last resort at this point in time, but let's see where we are in another 20 or 30 years. We need a growing economy to let the Fed stop holding interest rates down and we just don't have it. I don't see a second Obama term changing that and we would be four years farther down the road to ... well ... Greece.
To those saying unemployment above 12.5 million is a lie... it is actually the government's way of measuring that is a untruthful and deceptive. They count the number of unemployed that are still looking rather than "Unemployment Rate Adjusted for Nonemployment". See GRAPHS like: http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/economic-intelligence/2012/05/29/3-l...
I am a big Obama supporter. as many listeners disappointed with the President's performance in the debate. He was presidential, and I believe astonished with the flip flopping we were all witnessing on the stage from Romney.
,
On the subject of health care and the scare that Romney try's to promote of a " death squad " committee Does anyone think that insurance companies and hospitals don't have best practices type of policies and protocols that filter such patient care practices today?
also what about governments intervention into women's right to choose, I live in Virginia and the proposals of government intervention are maddening.
we democrats need to be stronger fighters.