DiscussMormonism.com

I was surprised at how well Romney did and I think I know a few reasons why:

Smirking

While I have never thought of smirking as an important element of a debate, that is because I had never seem it deployed as effectively as Gov. Romney did in this debate. Smirking helped establish with the audience, the fact that Gov. Romney held the truth in all things. It says, "trust me for I cannot lead you astray". Powerful stuff that smirking if used with righteousness.


Fluidity and Non-specifics

Romney excelled at letting us know his plan had the good parts with none of the bad parts. His plan would provide needed health care with no cuts to Medicare. He would do everything needed because he would utilize 'State Rights' since states live closer to their own citizens. As long as no one looks into states such as alphabetically from Alaska to Wyoming, this idea holds consecrated oil.

The beauty of the Romney Plans are that without specifics, they can be all things to all people. Romney has this unique ability as well, depending upon his audience.


Care for the Poor

Romney mentioned the poor at least four times. Obama catered only to the middle class. Points to Romney for pursuing the votes of this mooching 47%, whether they deserve his mention or not.

.

Hope those fact checkers do not go messing up this Romney win.

moksha wrote:I was surprised at how well Romney did and I think I know a few reasons why:

Smirking

While I have never thought of smirking as an important element of a debate, that is because I had never seem it deployed as effectively as Gov. Romney did in this debate. Smirking helped establish with the audience, the fact that Gov. Romney held the truth in all things. It says, "trust me for I cannot lead you astray". Powerful stuff that smirking if used with righteousness.


Fluidity and Non-specifics

Romney excelled at letting us know his plan had the good parts with none of the bad parts. His plan would provide needed health care with no cuts to Medicare. He would do everything needed because he would utilize 'State Rights' since states live closer to their own citizens. As long as no one looks into states such as alphabetically from Alaska to Wyoming, this idea holds consecrated oil.

The beauty of the Romney Plans are that without specifics, they can be all things to all people. Romney has this unique ability as well, depending upon his audience.


Care for the Poor

Romney mentioned the poor at least four times. Obama catered only to the middle class. Points to Romney for pursuing the votes of this mooching 47%, whether they deserve his mention or not.

.

Hope those fact checkers do not go messing up this Romney win.

More debates to come.

I don't understand why they shook hands and smiled at each other when the debate was over. Obama even shook hands with Romney's sons. It bothered me like it bothers me to watch opposing lawyers act like long time friends before a heated trial. It almost looked as strange as the Jew and the Palestinian hugging each other in the Naked Gun.

ajax18 wrote:I don't understand why they shook hands and smiled at each other when the debate was over. Obama even shook hands with Romney's sons. It bothered me like it bothers me to watch opposing lawyers act like long time friends before a heated trial. It almost looked as strange as the Jew and the Palestinian hugging each other in the Naked Gun.

Ajax! You dumped Stonewall as your avatar? It seemed so perfect.

ajax18 wrote:I don't understand why they shook hands and smiled at each other when the debate was over. Obama even shook hands with Romney's sons. It bothered me like it bothers me to watch opposing lawyers act like long time friends before a heated trial. It almost looked as strange as the Jew and the Palestinian hugging each other in the Naked Gun.

This is funny. When I saw them milling together it occurred to me that the true believers would be angry to see their guy acting chummy with the black devils.

I hate to say it, but Romney wiped the floor with Obama tonight. I felt embarrassed for Obama. His stammering rambling remarks were almost as bad as Clint Eastwood's at the RNC. I still think Mitt's a douchebag, but he came across as a stronger leader tonight.

DarkHelmet wrote:I still think Mitt's a douchebag, but he came across as a stronger leader tonight.

I agree that he won on style points. But is that really an accurate measure of being a strong leader of a country?

His stammering rambling remarks...

He did appear dumbfounded. I was a bit myself as I watched MR. How do you deal with someone who, when you point out his own stated stance on an issue, responds with an outright denial? It's probably a bit disorienting.

Obama should have done better. But I don't know if you can win a debate against someone with no moral rudder, who has taken every position on every issue, and is willing to say absolutely anything to win.

I heard about half the debate on the radio, and I was actually more impressed with Obama. I felt like Romney had too many "lists", and several responses where he tried to address too many issues one after another.

It sounded to me like Obama was trying to take the high road and be courteous and amicable, and I thought he succeeded in that regard. I also thought he said the "right" things to appeal to middle of the road voters. The only stumbling block for me was that he's been President for four years, so I can compare what he said with what he's done, so on issues like the deficit, he might say the right things but he obviously thinks differently.

But I'm happily surprised by the consensus in Romney's favor! I suspect we won't be seeing "nice" Obama again in the next two debates, and they will be totally different.

It really does no good for conservatives to beat their chests and praise Mitt Romney as a demigod. I don't know why everyone was so surprised last night. It's like the liberals brought into MSNBC news idea that Romney was stupid and couldn't compete with a superior intellect like Obama. In my view Romney is the finest statesman and Republican presidential candidate since Ronald Reagan, a lot better than Ajax. But the right side of the argument and even a very good man to present it doesn't translate into votes often enough to get the country turned in the right direction. I just wish some more on the left could see the value in conservative principles so that we don't turn into Greece or Spain or other failed socialist states. As I've said before applying conservative principles is not only in the best interest of middle class working families like my own, but also liberal men and women who go to work every day and choose to accept personal responsibility for their lives as well. Good people really do outnumber those bent on cheating the system, freeloading, and giving the country away to the Chinese, radical Islam, and illegal immigrants. Why can't we unite and save our country from the financial destruction that it is currently headed toward.

Hey Cinepro

cinepro wrote: I suspect we won't be seeing "nice" Obama again in the next two debates,

I agree!

and they will be totally different.

We shall see.

Peace,'
Ceeboo