First Presidential Debate thoughts and discussion

[trojanma]

I don't disagree, but this is a nonsensical fear tactic.

It is a fact that in the US that patients spend the vast amount of money in the last months of life. Ask any critical care physician and they will tell you that end of life care needs to change in the US as we are spending horrendous amounts of money to extend someones life by a week or two.

Right now all you need is for two doctors to sign off and you can pull someone off of life support. A death panel of two if you will.

---------- Post added at 09:21 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:20 PM ----------

I can see why, never understood why none of the respectable Republicans stood this time around, but could be worse you could have to choose between Palin or Obama
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
I think I shall bow out of politics on a US forum now though, you lot would just be angered by my "British Conservative" views on Universal Healthcare.

Universal (Single Payer) Healthcare is the only sensible way to do healthcare, but the US will never do it.

[trojanma]

From the Economist Live Blog, pretty much sums up how I feel about this debate:

"Here's the problem: Probably in response to the vagueness of Romney's "plans", Obama seems to have decided to bank heavily on specificity throughout. But that lets Romney go big and broad, and leaves Obama sounding comparatively small, and stuck in the weeds. It's fundamentally an incumbent v challenger problem: the incumbent must defend the complex reality that has occurred, while the challenger can rely on the future conditional."

[TheWalrus]

Almost over. Seems like a nothing debate, to me. Should be interesting to see if Obama hectoring Romney on not providing details and Romney still not providing details has any legs.

[trojanma]

The Economist suggested that Obama was intentionally boring in an effort to maintain status quo and keep the debates from changing too much.

[TheWalrus]

From the Economist Live Blog, pretty much sums up how I feel about this debate:

"Here's the problem: Probably in response to the vagueness of Romney's "plans", Obama seems to have decided to bank heavily on specificity throughout. But that lets Romney go big and broad, and leaves Obama sounding comparatively small, and stuck in the weeds. It's fundamentally an incumbent v challenger problem: the incumbent must defend the complex reality that has occurred, while the challenger can rely on the future conditional."

True enough. But going big isn't Romney's strength. He's fundamentally a technocrat who doesn't wear a lack of specificity well. At least in my view.

But like I said, this reads like a draw to me. Nothing particularly interesting happened in the key first 45 minutes. Each side will declare victory but the needle won't move, which I suppose given Obama is ahead means a win for him.

[CattailsrEdible]

ROMNEY in a beatdown! Osama sucks without someone else's answers on a teleprompter!

Sent From My EVO 4G LTE!

[Dolphins9954]

[Spesh]

No surprises. As others have said, status quo.

Romney made alot of promises, Obama called him on the details, Romney attacked Obama, Obama focused on specific points. Nothing we havent seen for the past, oh, year.

[trojanma]

I think Romney "won" the debate.

Partisan folks wont change.

I am watching the "hated" PBS and even Mark Shields(the pro democrat pundit) obliquely insinuated Romney did better by saying Obama was rusty.

[JCane]

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.