Quantcast
U.S. & World

News analysis: Mitt Romney stands tall by almost any measure, pundits agree

Comments

Return To Article
  • KJB1 Eugene, OR
    Oct. 3, 2012 11:10 p.m.

    For all the talk about the "liberal media" here, they were always going to give Romney kudos for simply not running off the stage in tears. Romney's supporters will say he won, Obama's will favor him, and not much will change as far as where the election is headed. On the other hand, Romney came across as rude and arrogant (smirking and talking over Jim Lehrer) and also provided the Obama campaign with plenty of ammo (He admitted to the world that he wants to turn Medicare into a voucher system.)

    Romney may have had a good night that will fire up his base, but anybody wanting a game-changing moment isn't going to get it. And with two debates to go (three, if you count Biden/Ryan), this isn't remotely over.

    You may now resume your gloating...

  • RockOn Spanish Fork, UT
    Oct. 3, 2012 11:27 p.m.

    Eric S. ... loved your line "Matthew's leg went numb." Very funny.

    I never mark off the debates as to who won or lost because unless my guy makes a fool of himself I always think he./she won. But, I watch the Twitter, Facebook, other social media and the national media. It was universal that Romney not only won but dominated.

    Does that mean he'll win the election? If he'd done poorly does it mean he lost the election? Either way, winning leads to winning and tonight helped Romney make his case directly to Americans without the media filters.

    More to come.

  • Wonder Provo, UT
    Oct. 3, 2012 11:28 p.m.

    I support Obama, but I thought Romney did a better job in this debate. I still don't like what he has planned (or what I think he has planned since he tends to switch things up depending on his audience), but I thought he presented what he wanted to present in a more effective way.

  • Joe Moe Logan, UT
    Oct. 3, 2012 11:31 p.m.

    KJB1, the key is what undecided voters think. A CBS poll showed HUGE gains for Romney in that category tonight. This debate was a game changer.

  • teleste Austin, TX
    Oct. 3, 2012 11:40 p.m.

    @ KJB1

    You're right. It isn't over and there are still three debates left. And that's precisely why O and his supporters should now be terrified.

    Personally, I can't wait to see Ryan absolutely destroy Biden. Tonight's beat down will pale in comparison.

  • county mom Monroe, UT
    Oct. 3, 2012 11:51 p.m.

    Teleste, I agree,I am feeling a little sorry for Biden. "It is terrible to go into a war of witts totally unarmed".
    It was obvious that Romney understands the free market and how to create jobs. Obama has been working under the illusion that the government can do this. Only the possibility of profits will get people to hire people. A flat economy and over taxed businesses can not create the jobs on the volume this nation needs.
    No matter how much money we put into education, if there are no jobs when we graduate, the money is wasted!!!

  • JJL Eugene, OR
    Oct. 3, 2012 11:53 p.m.

    I thought Romney's discussion about how ObamaCare was shoved through Congress without any bipartisan support was powerful. I have not seen much discussion from the pundits about that theme. For all the media's handwringing about "the people" wanting bi-partisan solutions to problems, the media is noticably silent on that issue where Romney shined tonight. "Trickle-down government" was an excellent theme as well.

    Prior to the debate, Team Obama played down expectations and Obama still couldn't meet those low expectations. I guess he should prepare more for the debates and less on his golf swing.

  • PTM ,
    Oct. 3, 2012 11:56 p.m.

    'Romney scored major substantive hits on several occasions, including repeated hits on Medicare, tying the $716 billion Medicare trust fund shift to Obamacare around the president's neck.'

    Eric, you fail to mention that the $716 billion are a savings from cost reducing measures - fraud, waste, reduced payments to providers - and that there will be no reduction in benefits to Medicare recipients, as was mentioned by Obama. Romney had a lot of energy and was on his game, but how about dealing with the facts of the debate. You also fail mention the prescription drug cost savings that the 'shift' afforded to seniors. This too was mentioned by Obama.

    Romney made an observation that reduced payments to providers may result in fewer doctors accepting Medicare patients. A good point for discussion. But let's not let the facts of the debate get in the way let's just talk about ' tying the $716 billion Medicare trust fund shift to Obamacare around the president's neck.'

  • OJF64 Sandy, UT
    Oct. 4, 2012 12:08 a.m.

    Mr. Romney did a great job of acting.

  • Joe Moe Logan, UT
    Oct. 4, 2012 12:10 a.m.

    JJL, in regards to the fact that no Republicans favored the ACA, let us recall that congressional Republicans said point blank at the start of Obama's administration that they would oppose EVERYTHING Obama put forth, regardless, for political gain. Sight unseen, they would oppose it. Even if they were Republican ideas originally. EVEN if they thought it was good for the country, in and of itself, they would oppose a bill if Obama supported it. Politicking at its worst, short of graft and fraud. And this Republican will not soon forget or forgive it.

    I will not condemn Obama for "not working with Republicans in congress." He tried, on several occasions. Obama is not Satan. He is just a Democrat. And some of his ideas and efforts have been good and praiseworthy.

  • JJL Eugene, OR
    Oct. 4, 2012 12:18 a.m.

    @PTM:

    Why is Obamacare needed to save costs? Why not implement "cost saving measures" such as "fruad, waste, reduce payment to providers" without the 2,700 pages of regulations - too much for even the Supreme Court to wade through?

    Also, Obama's claim that he has identified 4 trillion in specific cuts seems a little too slick. Including counting 1 trillion from the winding down of two wars - reductions that would happen regardless.

    Obama tried to run on Clinton's record, rather than his own.

  • Dadof5sons Montesano, WA
    Oct. 4, 2012 12:32 a.m.

    it was like watching The Holms Tex Cobb fight. Mitt being Holms and Obama being Tex Cobb!

  • sammyg Springville, UT
    Oct. 4, 2012 12:35 a.m.

    Could not be happier with the performance tonight from the next POTUS.

    Mitt controlled this debate and Obama's body language telegraphed his discomfort and irritation of this epic beat down.

    Talk radio and the polls will be on fire on Thursday.

    Can you imagine what Paul Ryan is going to do to the 'intellect of the Democrat Party' next week.

    Can Biden say 'mommie'?

  • fresnogirl Fresno, CA
    Oct. 4, 2012 12:37 a.m.

    Before listening to the debate, I was going to vote against Obama because he has failed to do the things he promised to do in 2008 that I wanted. Instead of cutting the deficit, he increased it; instead of closing Gitmo, he refurbished it; instead of repealing the Patriot Act, he extended it; instead of lowering unemployment, it lingers at 8%; instead of prosperity, we have higher poverty.

    After listening to Romney, I will be voting FOR Romney and not just against Obama. He seemed to understand how economics and business and leadership work. I love that he met every Monday with leaders from both parties to figure out solutions for his state. Pres. Obama can't even be bothered to sit in on his security briefings. Such a huge contrast in leadership, experience and skill set.

    Having said that, I am looking forward to the VP debate. That Joe Biden is a hoot! You never know what's gonna come out of his mouth. He's like Obama's Life Insurance policy. We are all praying that nothing happen to Barack because that'll leave Joe in charge!

  • Stephen Kent Ehat Lindon, UT
    Oct. 4, 2012 1:25 a.m.

    Reaching across the aisle and getting things done. I can do it. I have done it. I will do it.

    That is what I heard, first and foremost from Gov. Romney. He told how President Obama could reach out no farther than to Madame Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to push through Obamacare.

    Isn't it strange that President Obama has not been able to reach across anything to get Mr. Reid to pass a budget? Think about that! No aisle. No party difference. No ideological barrier. No need to compromise principle. Simply no reaching at all. Same party. Same love for America. Same need to come to our aid. And yet no budget.

    And I still hear future president Romney, over there at that other podium, speaking from experience, saying, I can reach across. I've done it. It can be done. I'll do it.

    Indeed, I can even in my mind's ear hear him proclaim: "I'm going to make it a point to unleash your Congressmen and Congresswomen, and let them shine and have favorable ratings in your eyes. They are your representatives. I'll work with them. We'll succeed.

  • Nate Pleasant Grove, UT
    Oct. 4, 2012 2:11 a.m.

    Obama will blame it on George Bush.

  • indycrimson Franklin, IN
    Oct. 4, 2012 2:28 a.m.

    The greatest thing about this years election is that potentially everyone wi s if Romney Ryan win! If they win America can be restored to the land where everyone is granted equal right (not equal results) and those who don't like that can move to France and have what Obama offers!

  • Igualmente Mesa, AZ
    Oct. 4, 2012 3:14 a.m.

    Undecideds do not exist. You either believe in capitalism or socialism. Problem is that so many more of us are out of work, or disheartened from even looking, that we have become addicted to government support, and disillusioned into believing that socialism is the only hope to move forward.

  • dumprake Washington, UT
    Oct. 4, 2012 3:22 a.m.

    Obama had nothing to defend, what's he's done (or failed to do) cannot be defended.when you've deceived America for four years, it's difficult to come out with a straight face and convince them your deceit was in fact truthful. And Obama has gotten a pass from the lackey press for four years--tonight, he got no pass, and he couldn't handle it. Now we know why Obama never has press conferences, he's a stumbling, fumbling, stuttering disaster when he has to actually defend his actions. November 6th can't come too soon.

  • ute alumni Tengoku, UT
    Oct. 4, 2012 5:25 a.m.

    Totally destroyed. Obama has no clue and Chris Mathews's legs are completely numb.

  • one day... South Jordan, UT
    Oct. 4, 2012 5:45 a.m.

    I think it was a good debate, Romney showed energy, Obama shows being tired of the sick nation he got years ago and I don't think has been an easy task to recover from that point.

    I don't really like these candidates, that's the truth, we need a strong leader for these bad times, a lot of people think that the new president needs to be a sort of magician in order to create jobs and put the country on track again, but this will take years, to recover will take years.

    We need more jobs in order to produce and pay taxes, both of them are saying no more taxes, but honestly, we need to get some extra money from someone like it or not, military spending to be cut and get the robot from mars, it doesn't make any sense that!!! plus the candidates to donate the campaign donation to the country and debt!

  • RG Buena Vista, VA
    Oct. 4, 2012 6:03 a.m.

    While I was watching the debate last night, Romney's voice and face seemed to morph into Reagan's. It was like watching the Reagen vs. Carter debate.

  • Rifleman Salt Lake City, Utah
    Oct. 4, 2012 6:05 a.m.

    Re: KJB1 Eugene, OR
    "Romney may have had a good night that will fire up his base, ..."

    It isn't Romney's base you should be worried about. Like 'Joe Moe' said above, it is the undecided voters that should have you worried.

  • I M LDS 2 Provo, UT
    Oct. 4, 2012 6:30 a.m.

    True, Romney was smooth... like an experienced used car salesman.

  • Fred44 Salt Lake City, Utah
    Oct. 4, 2012 6:39 a.m.

    Romney won because he moved to the center. He stayed away from his tea party talking points. He is very talented person and a politician. The devil however is in the details. Over the coming weeks he will have to start putting specifics behind his tax plan. He hinted at limiting deductions, and that could mean a tax increase for middle class Americans even if he cuts the rate. The next few days will be interesting as some of his "new" positions are vetted by the democrats. He may have made a mistake when he said that "there are no tax breaks for moving jobs overseas, and if there were he needs a new accountant". That comment is going to lead to a push to see his tax returns for the last 10 years to see if he has taken any tax breaks for outsourcing jobs.

    Yesterdays win maybe tomorrow's loss.

  • t702 Las Vegas, NV
    Oct. 4, 2012 6:39 a.m.

    It looked Mitt gave the student in Obama great lesson in economy 101

  • Legal Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 4, 2012 6:57 a.m.

    I voted for Obama in 2008. I did this because I believed he would make a change. Four years later... we are worse off. He didn't even try to fulfill many campaign promises. I volunteered during the 2002 Winter Olympics and saw what Mr. Romney did with that upside down situation. If Mr. Romney can do to our economic mess even a fraction of what he did with the Olympics - I am for him. We NEED a change. This isn't a football game, there are too many "fans" that no matter what will cheer for their "democrat team." I'm NOT one of them. I'll be voting for Mia Love this year too. We really need an economic change.

  • Furry1993 Ogden, UT
    Oct. 4, 2012 6:59 a.m.

    Romney looked like a petulant bully through the entire debate. He also lied through his teeth. There was nothing substantive in what he said -- it was all ambiguity and fluff. The President provided the substance and the specifics . . . and the rationality and level-headedness. One thing though -- Romney proved why he should never be elected.

  • Springvillepoet Springville, UT
    Oct. 4, 2012 7:03 a.m.

    I am going to vote for President Obama (big surprise to all the regulars on these comment boards, I know), but Mitt Romney did the better job last night. He defended his position very well and he hit President Obama's weak spots. President Obama, by my count, missed three opportunities to call out Romney, but failed to do so,

    1. Not answering the moderator's 1st question about "Trickle Down Government."

    2. Not revealing the historical numbers that every GOP administration in the past 60 years has made government bigger (# of employees) and most Dems have reduced the size of government.

    3. Not explaining the $716 Billion issue better.

    My last comment is about the rules of the debate, which both candidates ignored:

    If you are going to have a debate and not force your candidates to stick to the rules, what's the point? I think it's time for a new set of rules. Perhaps Oxford Rules, or something along the lines of a more effective adaptation of the Lincoln-Douglass format.

  • A1994 Centerville, UT
    Oct. 4, 2012 7:12 a.m.

    @KJB1

    " this isn't remotely over."

    A statement I don't think any Obama supporter ever dreamed they'd be saying before the debate started last night. Nixon was sweaty and pale. Reagan said, "There you go again." Michael Dukakis floundered with a question about his wife getting raped and murdered. George H.W. Bush looked at his watch. Barack Obama looked at the floor while Mitt Romney taught him.

  • Rifleman Salt Lake City, Utah
    Oct. 4, 2012 7:31 a.m.

    Re: Furry1993 Ogden, UT
    "Romney looked like a petulant bully through the entire debate."

    Visit Real Clear Politics and see what the knowledgeable authorities have to say about last night's debate. Romney cleaned Obama's clock ..... and that isn't good news for Jim Matheson who finds himself trailing Mia Love for his seat in the US House of Representatives.

  • Mountanman Hayden, ID
    Oct. 4, 2012 7:41 a.m.

    Romney demonstrated great leadership in the debate, especially when asked about his specific details of reducing the size of deficit and other changes he said, several times, “he will take PRINCIPLES into the White House and in a bi-partisan way, the details will be hammered out but within the bounds of the principles he brings”. If you go into any negotiation with its my way or the highway (like how we got Obamacare), that’s not leadership, that’s dictatorship!

  • xscribe Colorado Springs, CO
    Oct. 4, 2012 7:44 a.m.

    I don't watch the debates, but watch to see what the pundits say afterwards. Seems Romney won this debate. Good for him. I have always said he is going to win this election, and his gap will widen very shortly, debates or no debates. However, can he deliver? It's one thing to promise; it's another to actually deliver!

  • J-TX Allen, TX
    Oct. 4, 2012 8:03 a.m.

    I thought it was interesting how little Obama really knows about how the economy really works. The main thing he doesn't understand is that you can raise overall tax revenue while lowering tax rates. If lowering tax rates gets more people working and more businesses selling more, you get more payroll taxes, more business profit taxes, more sales taxes, more property taxes from increased housing starts. This is a foreign concept to Obama, but Romney understands it.

  • Bifftacular Spanish Fork, Ut
    Oct. 4, 2012 8:08 a.m.

    The most telling parts of the debate were when Obama continually quoted all the good things that happened during the Clinton years but almost no mention of his own record. I think that said it all. In 2008 Obama campaigned on "hope and change", "change and hope". He never had to say anything of substance because he didn't need to. It was clear he didn't know how to handle direct face to face criticism of his own record. He looked like a deer in the headlights. The sheen has come off.

  • KJB1 Eugene, OR
    Oct. 4, 2012 8:13 a.m.

    teleste:

    Yes, there are two more debates. The first is a town hall format, where Romney isn't going to be able to get away with talking over a roomful of voters. The second focuses on foreign policy, where Romney's experience consists of offending Great Britain and wishing we weren't only fighting one war.

    Personally, I wish Obama had been more energetic last night, but there were no real gaffes on his part, nothing the opposition can point to as a mistake. Romney, on other hand, left himself exposed in other ways: Medicare into vouchers, a tax plan that makes no sense, "firing Big Bird." Look around online and you'll already see that the fact checkers aren't being kind to him. And, contrary to what some people here are saying, there are few undecideds left and Romney has to win virtually all of them to beat Obama. Yes, he had a good night and will get a bump, but there's nowhere left for him to go from here except down.

  • Craig Clark Boulder, CO
    Oct. 4, 2012 8:21 a.m.

    I hope this jarred the White House enough to wake them up to the reality that Obama might not be able to win this race by playing it safe. Last night, Romney sounded like he's become his own man who's now playing for keeps. He doesn't need to schmooze up to the right wing any longer and a sound whupping by Mitt might be just what the President needs if he hopes to persuade voters to give him a second term.

  • Mountanman Hayden, ID
    Oct. 4, 2012 8:22 a.m.

    @ KJB. I heard that Hugo Chavez endorsed Obama. That should give Obama a bump among liberals. No word if the debate changed Chavez’s mind!

  • ProudUtahn St. George, Utah
    Oct. 4, 2012 8:27 a.m.

    KJB1 Eugene, OR
    "Romney's supporters will say he won" Even the libral press said he won, did you not read all those comments?
    "On the other hand, Romney came across as rude and arrogant (smirking and talking over Jim Lehrer) and also provided the Obama campaign with plenty of ammo (He admitted to the world that he wants to turn Medicare into a voucher system.)"
    Had that been Obama, I am guessing you would have said he was agressive and Presidential?
    I saw your comment comming in some form, how the media approached these debates, in one report they set up the idea that Romney needed to back off his arrogance to show him being a common person, then turn around and say he needed to be agressive to show the country he could stand up to the world for the United States. How I saw this was they were setting up Mitt Romney so they could spin what ever happened to say I told you so and make it look bad for him.
    But first reports even from the liberal press was he did greet, lets see over time how their going to spin for Obama.

  • metamoracoug metamora, IL
    Oct. 4, 2012 8:28 a.m.

    PTM: the "savings" in Medicare are largely the result of paying less to providers which Mr. Romney countered by noting that an estimated 15% of providers would then refuse to accept Medicare -- which includes our office (we perform a $2500 service for which Medicare reimburses $525, plus a $125 co-payment).

  • metamoracoug metamora, IL
    Oct. 4, 2012 8:34 a.m.

    Fred 44: Mr. Obama has already dramatically raised taxes on the middle class through Obamacare in the following ways:

    1) Medical device tax: imposes a new 2.3% excise tax on gross on gross sales -- even if the company didn't make a profit. Medical device manufacturers employ 490,000 in 12,000 plants across the country. not only burdening small businesses, this tax raises the cost of everything from pacemakers to prosthetics.

    2) Currently, flexible spending accounts (FSA) are unlimited by law though employers may place a cap on them. This is pre-tax dollars. Obamacare caps FSAs at $2500. This affects 30-35 million Americans who use FSAs to meet basic medical needs. It could dramatically affect families with special needs children.

    3) Medical itemized deductions: Currently, Americans facing high medical expenses are allowed a deduction of all expenses exceeding 7.5% of adjusted gross income (AGI). Obamacare raises this deduction to 10 percent of AGI. By limiting this deduction, Obamacare widens the net of taxable income for the sickest Americans.

  • ksampow Farr West, Utah
    Oct. 4, 2012 8:36 a.m.

    Romney is the clear winner when the voters get to hear him directly, instead of through the liberal filters used by most of the mainstream media. This time, even MSNBC, CNN, ABC, and CBS had to concede that Romney did better, because saying otherwise would expose their liberal bias to anyone who watched the debate. (Although some of the commentators tried to downplay the importance of the debate, which they would not have done had Obama appeared to win.)

  • Mike in Cedar City Cedar City, Utah
    Oct. 4, 2012 8:41 a.m.

    Romney won on style, Obama won on substance. Too often in the public eye style is more important. But it was the same old Romney on steroids. Mean spirited, entitled, waving in the breeze, and patently loose with the truth. Obama failed to call him out on a number of issues like his sudden change of heart on the plight of the middle class in view of his more candid remarks about the 47% of us who in his mind are deadbeats.

  • metamoracoug metamora, IL
    Oct. 4, 2012 8:41 a.m.

    Mountainman @ 7:41: Well said.

    Another important point that the media has overlooked is a small act that the President signed recently:

    In a short memo released Friday, President Barack Obama announced that he would waive economic penalties for certain countries employing child soldiers, citing “the national interest” in doing so. The memo stated that all sanctions imposed under the Child Soldiers Prevention Act of 2008 would be waived for Libya, South Sudan, and Yemen, and portion’s of the law’s requirements would be lifted for the Democratic Republic of the Congo. The exact national interests requiring these waivers was not stated.

    It is reported that this is the third year Mr. Obama has waived penalties under this act.
    Jesse Eaves, the senior policy adviser for child protection at World Vision, said the president was trying to maintain good relationships with the countries to ensure security assistance, but called the move “bizarre” because of how strongly Obama has come out publicly against precisely this kind of child exploitation.

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    Oct. 4, 2012 8:55 a.m.

    Great debate!

    Mitt Romney FINALLY got away from the uber-far-right-wingnuts who've high-jacked the GOP, was more himself, and showed his mor moderate Centrist self.

    I'd would've liked to hear more HOW he's gonna create 12 million new jobs....

    But all in all, gotta say it - Romney pasted the President.

    Not that it swayed me --
    I'm still voting for Gary Johnson (L)

  • Brave Sir Robin San Diego, CA
    Oct. 4, 2012 8:57 a.m.

    This morning MSNBC released a poll about if/how the debate swayed voters:

    42% said the debate did not sway them.
    17% said the debate made them more likely to vote Obama.
    41% said the debate made them more likely to vote Romney.

    That's huge. And it sounds like there are more undecideds out there than anybody believes.

  • bricha lehi, ut
    Oct. 4, 2012 9:23 a.m.

    The best part in my opinion was when Romney was able to compare our economy to Spains economy Obama countering it.

  • dragon12 Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 4, 2012 9:25 a.m.

    Romney has shown his true colors over and over in his overt display of disrespect for others and his narcissistic need for control. Not to mention how many cars, homes, and other monetary pleasures this man cherishes. On the other hand, Obama and the First Lady have demonstrated to citizens how they can be self sufficient by their service oriented lifestyle (teaching students how to garden and enjoy its harvest, choosing to give back to the community instead of building powerful empires, etc.). When Romney talks about morals (or anything else for that matter) it is all talk for appearances sake. God help us all if Romney fools the majority of America's citizens. However, I do have hope that he won't.

  • rightascension Provo, UT
    Oct. 4, 2012 9:28 a.m.

    Technically, last night's encounter was not a debate since we got a lot of statement and restatement of contrary positions. Romney's numbers do not add up to my mind -- but in fairness, Obama's numbers do not add up either. To look into Romney's eyes is rather like looking into the eyes of J Pierpont Morgan, whose gaze was once described as like looking into the headlamp of an oncoming train. Obama looked like a professor on a Thursday afternoon that will not end confronting a class full of know it all juniors.

  • GZE SALT LAKE CITY, UT
    Oct. 4, 2012 9:36 a.m.

    I watched only the first 20 minutes and the last 20 minutes so maybe Romney was excellent in the middle. All the reviewers seem to think so. I thought they both sounded like idiots - with the exception of the President's closing comments - which, to my mind, sounded presidential.

    The tragedy of the night was Jim Lehrer. I have long respected him as an honest newsman. He embarrassed himself and his profession last night by losing control during the first 5 minutes. He never regained it. Mitt Romney bullied him. To his credit, it worked so might as well keep doing it. The format quickly descended into something other than a debate. I think it's time for Jim Lehrer to retire. I hope the other moderators will take note and keep the debate an actual debate.

  • FT salt lake city, UT
    Oct. 4, 2012 9:38 a.m.

    I've decided to switch my vote to Mitt Romney. Oh, wait a minute. I live in Utah and my vote is really meaningless.

  • nick Provo, UT
    Oct. 4, 2012 9:39 a.m.

    At one point in the debate, there was a loud thud behind the stage. It was Obama's telepromper committing suicide. All the hard work the prompter has done for the past four years just went up in smoke with Obama's sorry performance. He just couldn't take it any more and ended it all.

  • MVH Farmington, UT
    Oct. 4, 2012 9:41 a.m.

    Take a look at both men on that debate platform last night. Now ask yourself which man would you take financial advice from. That man is Mitt Romney.

  • Peter R Provo, UT
    Oct. 4, 2012 9:49 a.m.

    When discussing Romney's comment on education, Obama included himself in the crowd of parents that might have trouble paying for their kids' college. He has done such a successful job of painting himself as the "people's candidate" that no one challenges this statement. He's long been part of the 1% that is so maligned these days! To include himself in that group was a shock to me. Unfortunately for Romney, most people still believe that and this man who fights for the classes and equality has been über successful in committing class warfare.

  • JoeCapitalist2 Orem, UT
    Oct. 4, 2012 9:51 a.m.

    Romney clearly won this debate. Whether it (and other wins in the other two debates) will be enough to win him the election is the big question.

    As many Obama supporters on this forum have demonstrated, nothing will sway their vote. Obama could do the most outrageous thing possible and they would still vote for him. (To be fair, Romney also has some of those kinds of supporters as well.)

    The biggest question in this (and every) election, is how many voters truely have an open mind and can be persuaded to put the good of the country ahead of their own party politics.

    We can argue all day (and we probably will) over who has the best plan to move the country forward, but in that debate Romney simply showed more competence in actually executing his plan. Obama appeared unsure of himself when pushed to go deeper than talking-points rhetoric and get to the details of implementation.

  • staypuffinpc Provo, UT
    Oct. 4, 2012 9:52 a.m.

    @Stephen Kent Ehat, your comment about Obama not only not reaching across the aisle, but failing to convince anyone in his own party is interesting. It's curious to me that the fact that Obama hasn't even been able to get a single democrat to vote for his budget in nearly four years. Regardless of your party affiliation, if you ran a business, or any organization for that matter, why would you grant tenure to someone who can't get a single person to agree with one of his prime responsibilities?

  • Millsap fan Taylorsville, UT
    Oct. 4, 2012 9:52 a.m.

    Romney seemed like the one with the experience and knowledge about how to run the country. Clearly he has the qualifications to run this country.

    I thought President Obama did ok until the closing argument. Once he finished i laughed and said out loud, "Wow, that was a weak closing argument." I think the poor guy just wanted it to be over.

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    Oct. 4, 2012 9:55 a.m.

    How's THIS from the "Liberal" Lame-Stream Media ---

    Romney vs. Empty Chair
    Maher: Obama Needs Teleprompter
    Carr: Prez 'Crushed' by Romney
    Goodwin: This One's Game-Changer
    Sullivan: A Disaster for Obama
    Barone: Romney Took CommandFT: Time for Obama Game ChangeKurtz: What Will Obama Do Now?

    Why do I post this?

    Because I'm SICK and tired of the Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, FoxNews addicts who keep saying and blaming the media.

    They report what they see -- period.

    The problem has been the GOP has run a terrible race thus far,
    Last night the Etch-a-Sketch candidate moved further Moderate, Center Right, and left the uber-far-right-wingnut Tea Party aside.

    BTW --Mitt Romney came out a s flaming RINO, in case you missed it.

  • jsf Centerville, UT
    Oct. 4, 2012 10:04 a.m.

    The great climate change scientist Al Gore explained the lackluster performance of Obama on the high altitude. But Obama did his prep in Las Vegas, and we all know "What happens in Vegas stays in Vegas."

    dragon12 "Obama and the First Lady have demonstrated to citizens how they can be self sufficient by their service oriented lifestyle." Have you checked the tax payers price tag for their vacations? You do realize they are purchasing a multi million home in Hawaii. This comment is really reaching to paint a picture that does not exist. Ann Romney gets hammered by the press for wearing a blouse that costs hundreds, and Michelle gets a free pass for wearing outfits that cost thousands.

  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    Oct. 4, 2012 10:05 a.m.

    To "dragon12" what are you talking about?! Obama goes on vacations to destinations filled with the ultra wealthy, and flies around on a 747 all the time. Where has Obama given service?

    Also, FYI, the gardening that was taught was done by the white house gardener, not Michelle.

    The Obama's have personally given back to the the community about as much as a leech gives back to its host.

    Go back and read about what Romney has done. He has been an unpaid leader within the LDS church where he worked to raise the spirits of the downtrodden, he personally paid for milk at a VA center. While governor, he went out and went and worked as a day as a garbage man, and other similar jobs. What has Obama done? So far your examples are 100% false and fail to look at reality.

  • Counter Intelligence Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 4, 2012 10:06 a.m.

    Carter spent his entire election season trying to vilify Reagan as an unacceptable alternative - because Carter knew he could not be elected on his own record. Reagan blew away all those vilification's at the debates and won handily.

    Romney is not Reagan - but Obama is worse than Carter - and all those nasty comments about Romney from the Obama campaign are now clearly just that - nasty. Undecideds are not going to go for Obama - they have already decided against him - they merely needed to have a reason to be pro Romney - and now they have it. Any states that Obama does not now poll above %50 in, are now completely lost to him.

    @LDS Liberal
    "Mitt Romney FINALLY got away from the uber-far-right-wingnuts who've high-jacked the GOP, was more himself, and showed his mor moderate Centrist self"

    And Obama continues to demonstrate he is captivated by the far far far far far far (limit of 200 words) left.

  • Rifleman Salt Lake City, Utah
    Oct. 4, 2012 10:12 a.m.

    Re: LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    "Why do I post this? Because I'm SICK and tired of the Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, FoxNews addicts who keep saying and blaming the media."

    They posted it because to do anything else would have destroyed their credibility and they can't allow that ..... even for their friend Obama.

    The liberal media was left with no other option but to call it like everybody else saw it.

  • Millsap fan Taylorsville, UT
    Oct. 4, 2012 10:14 a.m.

    I love when people try to make a candidate out to be the villain. With President Obama he hates America and wants it to be weak and he is a Muslim. IT'S NOT TRUE!

    With Romney, people say he hates the poor, has never worked hard, is materialistic, rude, etc.

    Neither candidate is a villain. Both are good men, both have character, it simply comes down to who will help this country and its people thrive the most. My vote is for Romney, but it doesn't change the fact that the President is a good person who loves America.

  • Craig Clark Boulder, CO
    Oct. 4, 2012 10:18 a.m.

    dragon12,

    "....Romney has shown his true colors over and over in his overt display of disrespect for others and his narcissistic need for control...."

    ==========

    The race for the Presidency does not exactly attract self-effacing individuals and that’s as it should be. You have to have an above normal ego to aspire to such an awesome job. Romney’s ego shows in how he answers questions feeling no obligation to tell the public precisely where he stands on issues. It's as though he sees it as his prerogative to decide what voters need to be told and only when he’s good and ready. Voters can decide for themselves what they think of that.

    Obama’s ego showed last night in how he reacted to Romney with what struck me as smug dismissiveness. If the President didn’t respect Romney before last night, he does now. Or at least he should.

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 4, 2012 10:34 a.m.

    One thing that is patently clear in the debate... Romney is not honest and thinks Americans can't do math.

    He lied about taxes (the math doesn't add up on his claims about the rich not having their taxes lowered... also he's lying that his plan doesn't reduce taxes on the rich since he's said all along that the job creators, i.e. rich, are overburdened with taxation). He lied about Medicare since the Ryan budget has the Obama cuts to it in it, and Romney would affect current seniors since getting rid of Obamacare opens back up the donut hole. He lied about repealing Obamacare as a means of reducing the deficit (between the tax increases and Medicare cuts, Obamacare pays for itself).

    He presents his tax plan hoping Americans can't figure out that to make it revenue neutral as claimed he'd have to get rid of some important middle-class used tax credits, like the ones for children, mortgages, or earned income. His deficit reduction plan consists of getting rid of Obamacare (CBO says repeal would increase the deficit) and getting rid of PBS while cutting revenue and increasing defense spending.

  • Mountanman Hayden, ID
    Oct. 4, 2012 10:35 a.m.

    The reason Obama lost this debate is because it was about IDEAS, SUBSTANCE! For the first time in this campaign America saw Mitt Romney as he really is; intelligent, informed, an insightful and a credible leader with real solutions. Not the usual Democrat attempts of character assassination. That’s all the Democrats have! Don’t believe it? Watch what the Democrats do next!

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 4, 2012 10:37 a.m.

    @JoeCapitalist2
    "As many Obama supporters on this forum have demonstrated, nothing will sway their vote."

    Why would I have my vote swayed when I'm someone who knows Romney was lying through his teeth for most of the debate? Winning a debate doesn't make someone the better President. Gingrich won some debates in South Carolina after all, that didn't make him better than Romney (though the loons in South Carolina did give him a primary win for it). If I were to be convinced by Romney he'd have to show some math and details on his tax plans and his deficit reduction plans but he doesn't. Probably because Americans wouldn't like what they'd see.

  • athought Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 4, 2012 10:42 a.m.

    Agree with most on these posts -- Romney won! I'm an independent and vote for who I think would do the best job. I'm going for Romney, not because he has all the answers, but he's a business man. Just judging what he did with the Olympics here in Utah shows he knows how to turn things around. Look at past presidents -- how many of them have been lawyers -- how many business men. It will take someone saavy with business ideals to turn this country and economy around. As far as the medicare voucher program, tell me if I missed something. What I heard was nothing would change for people on medicare or those close to retirement. The future would include the program as is OR the voucher program -- the person would decide.

    When you look at the split screen of the debate it's almost like a child being chastised for something he knows he did wrong with Obama looking down the entire time, and every so often looking up for a second. I've seen that look on my kids when I'm confronting them about something they did wrong. Looking towards next weeks :>D

  • happy2BGrandma Pleasant Grove, UT
    Oct. 4, 2012 10:42 a.m.

    If you look at the candidates education and background, you should have known the outcome of last night's debate as soon as they said it would be about the economy. Obama was a constitutional professor. He knows the law. Romney has the financial and business training and experience. Watching the commentary early this morning by the CNN group, they seemed surprised. Again, I believe the outcome was pretty much not a surprise. Additionally, Romney is up against an overall liberal media that hasn't painted him in a kind light throughout the campaign. Last night he said the very things he has said for years, but he was front and center, and not speaking at some obscure area of Ohio, etc. Obama is an intelligent man who really does have concern about our country, but he does not have the skill set we currently need.

  • mteig HEBER CITY, UT
    Oct. 4, 2012 10:50 a.m.

    It is easier to win when you are right, when what you say is true, when the facts are overwhelmingly on your side.

    The reason Romney's demeanor was so strong, enthusiastic and effective is because he knows he has the truth on his side. When you do not have the truth on your side, you will look down, look away, not make eye contact with your opponent and you will ramble.

    When Romney pointed out that President Obama said he would cut the deficit in half and then he doubled it, what can Obama say? He blamed it all on what had happened before he was President. I found that insulting to the American intelligence and a response hopeful of our complete ignorance and stupidity (Web definitions: a poor ability to understand or to profit from experience.).

    After all, the President was well aware at the time of all those things he pointed out in defense of his failure, whether they were accurate or not, yet he made those campaign promises anyway in order to get elected. For four years he has continued to blame others for a tremendous failure to do what he said he would do.

  • Brave Sir Robin San Diego, CA
    Oct. 4, 2012 10:59 a.m.

    @atl134

    "One thing that is patently clear in the debate... Romney is not honest and thinks Americans can't do math."

    He's right - Americans can't do math. Our school test scores stand as a testament to that. As does the fact that the average American has over $55k in consumer debt.

    I'll take it a step further and say that Americans aren't smart, period. Why else would so many of us fallen for Obama's student-body-president-esque promises in 2008 and elected him?

  • What Ever Salt Lake City,, UT
    Oct. 4, 2012 11:01 a.m.

    @Dragon12:
    I am so glad I read your comment. I will sleep much better knowing that in spite of our HUGE deficit, record high unemployment rates, the Medicare crisis running rampant, that President Obama and his wife are planting a garden. Why worry?!

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    Oct. 4, 2012 11:03 a.m.

    I must say, of all the Romneys I’ve seen, this debate Romney is my favorite.

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 4, 2012 11:09 a.m.

    @athought
    "Look at past presidents -- how many of them have been lawyers -- how many business men."

    Yeah but... the businessmen were Hoover and the Bush's. That's like one average president (H. W. Bush) and two presidents that left behind massive economic disasters.

    "As far as the medicare voucher program, tell me if I missed something. What I heard was nothing would change for people on medicare or those close to retirement. "

    Not exactly. Repeal of Obamacare gets rid of some of the benefits for seniors in there like closing the donut hole. Personally, my parents are just below 55 and my mom has diabetes. I don't care if Romney really has no effect on those 55+ since I don't want my mom to have to deal with trying to get insurance in a marketplace that can discriminate based on pre-existing conditions (Romney was deceptive, his plan only protects those with continuing coverage from pre-existing conditions... not everyone which does nothing to help the sick or those who lose their jobs for more than 3 months and have their health insurance lapse) with a voucher that is thousands below what's needed.

  • suess Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 4, 2012 11:11 a.m.

    Please educate me as I really don't know. Many of these posts say Romney has to lay out his economic and tax plan so we all know what it is. Am I wrong, or does Romney have access to all of the numbers concerning the taxes, economy, and budget for the US? My thinking would be like going into a new job. You're aware things aren't right and things need to be done, and you can make the comments that there needs to be a new budget, new rules, etc., but until you're actually there, you have no real idea what's involved. I don't think Romney came across as arrogant, as a bully, or disrespectful -- I just saw that Obama was way in over his head. He just doesn't have the answers, if he's tried, things haven't worked. I like the comment by Romney that he didn't try to work any further than Pelosi. It's obvious he hasn't worked with Congress.

    In my schooling, I've learned that laws, etc come through Congress -- not the president. He's limited in what he can do. Right or Wrong?

  • Midwest Mom Soldiers Grove, WI
    Oct. 4, 2012 11:16 a.m.

    If a "strong performance" means pushy and dogmatic, then Romney carried the day.

    Fortunately, I have kept up with the issues. so I already knew that Obama's argument is correct; Romney's tax plan does not compute and neither does the rest of his Regan-retread, wishful-trickle economics.

    I am no fan of Obama because he stands with Republicans in the movement to privatize education and he has abandoned the cause of working men and women. Right to work states have the poorest families and the worst education outcomes, yet this is the plan that the right has for America, and the left no longer opposes.

    The sad truth, that neither party will admit and no American wants to be told, is that the human worker is becoming obsolete, thanks to globalization and advances in technology, robotics and artificial intelligence. Politicians are bought and sold and accountable only to those at the top. But as long as a Republican waves a flag; pays homage to God and founding fathers; scape-goats immigrants; and chides the poor, they have the vote of conservative ostriches who only want to be told that "all is well in Zion."

  • I M LDS 2 Provo, UT
    Oct. 4, 2012 11:25 a.m.

    Romney "won"?

    Not necessarily.

    Take, for example, a CBS poll of undecided voters. 46% of them said Romeny won; 22% said Obama won; but 32% said it was a tie! That makes fully 54% who either picked Obama or said "tie." Romney's 46% hardly constitutes a blowout. That's lower than the totals he's been getting in national polls lately. And these were previously undecided voters, not Romney's dyed in the wool base.

  • Built2Last Provo, UT
    Oct. 4, 2012 11:35 a.m.

    Even though Romney cleaned the floor with Obama last night, the pundits are saying that Romney is lying about his plans or changing his tune for the debates. What is humorous about his is that the pundits and Obama campaign have created a straw man that they have labelled as Romney Policies and Beliefs. So when Romney clearly and articulately states what he believes and what he will do, they freak out because it doesn't agree with the straw man they created. It's kind of humorous to watch.

    Romney looked very presidential last night. Obama looked like a child being scolded in the principal's office.

  • Springvillepoet Springville, UT
    Oct. 4, 2012 11:42 a.m.

    @Joe Capitalist2

    Not so.

    I clearly stated my reasons for why I believe President Obama lost the debate. Those reasons have nothing to do with my personal politics. I support President Obama, but that does not mean he hasn't given me reason for pause. My decision to vote for him is based upon my personal viewpoints and who I believe the best person is to be President. No debate will change that, but not because I am some mindless lemming, but rather because I made my mind up based upon my beliefs, my interpretation of events over the past four years (and really the events of the past 40 years), and what I believe as a U.S. citizen, a veteran, a teacher, a husband and father, and a member of the world-wide community.

    I give everyone else that consideration, and would hope the debates give the candidates an opportunity to clarify their beliefs as well as convince undecided voters.

  • Mad Hatter Provo, UT
    Oct. 4, 2012 11:42 a.m.

    From where I sat, Romney was relatively well-received. Athough there were many times where looked like his was not feeling well, he appears as if his stomach were acting up, he did extremely well in putting forward his position. He was a new Romney expounding moderate views which came across a perhaps a reality check for his conservative base. Also, the two men were very cordial and mature in the discussion.

    However, saying that Romney "won" and Obama "lost" is juvenile since we need to analyze what was said and the accuracy of those statements. The so-called "pundits" have an agenda. They are not paid to be honest and unprejudiced. What they say today they will say something different tomorrow. Those looking for Obama to "come out swinging" don't want civil discourse. Romney had a few "zingers" to excite his audience, but he did his job and disappointed everyone who thought he do poorly.

    Romney had a different debate experience than he did during the primaries. Then he had to "Out Right" people like Newt Gingrich, Rick Perry and Rick Santorum. Here he etch-at-sketched himself back toward the center.

    Nonetheless, two debates remain.

  • What Ever Salt Lake City,, UT
    Oct. 4, 2012 11:44 a.m.

    @Midwest Mom; That is harsh. I hope you don't talk to your kids the way you write in the comment boards. Nothing like teaching them young to give up. And just for the record, "all is not well in Zion." Obama didn't help, so all of the conservative ostriches are looking for somebody who might really make a difference.

  • Third try screen name Mapleton, UT
    Oct. 4, 2012 11:55 a.m.

    Why did Obama keep using the term "Middle Class" over and over again?
    As though it would somehow change the plight of being underemployed, under water on our mortgages and under performing in our retirement portfolio.
    He cuddled up to us four years ago. We don't get fooled again.

  • Ying Fah Provo, UT
    Oct. 4, 2012 11:57 a.m.

    Those who wanted Romeny to "win" the debate will say that he "won" the debate. Those who wanted Obama to "win" will argue that he did just that.

    Take away the names. Take away the faces. Just listen to the words and a new picture may emerge. One thing for certain. Romney spent two months preparing for this debate while two more debates will come in the next three weeks. The debate strategists for each side has seen the tactics of the other side. If anything is certain, it is that the next debate will be very different. Perhaps it will be more like what was hyped this time around. Perhaps Obama will be more aggressive and really go after Romney on specifics. Perhaps Romney will be more specific and provide a blueprint of what he will do if elected president.

    At the moment we have seen a flash in the pan which will fade into memory by tomorrow. We're still at the football rally cheering the team on. I would say it was Mr. Passion and Mr. Cool. I will only say that Romney sounded much more moderate than he has in many years.

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    Oct. 4, 2012 11:58 a.m.

    Romney's plan:
    A $5 trillion over 10 yrs tax reduction which will maintain revenue neutrality. How? Wait and see. (btw In the debate Romney stated 6 other studies showed his unspecified "plan" could work. But those studies actually do not provide much evidence that Romney’s proposal — as sketchy as it is — would be revenue neutral without making unrealistic assumptions)
    .
    Create 12 million jobs (which btw the number of jobs projected if the economy continues the expected trajectory). How? Wait and see.

    Obama should just promise pie-in-the-sky too.
    And lie.

    Romney's Olympic success consisted of the largest influx of federal dollars ever to support the Olympics and his rich buddies.

    Bain's mode was/is to leverage up mature (not failing) companies, pay themselves, break unions and in some cases, ship jobs overseas.

    re:JSF
    The Obamas are not purchasing a home in Hawaii. Just another lie passed around by right-winged sources.

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 4, 2012 12:10 p.m.

    CNNs debate sample group thought overwhelmingly that Romney won the debate but the groups pre-debate favorability of Obama was 49-50 and of Romney was 54-42 (this is a really skewed survey since Obama leads on favorability nationally, but skewed is okay if we're charting the same group of people). Post debate favorability? Obama 49-49 (a shift from -1 to 0 net approval, a one point improvement). Romney 56-42 (a shift from +12 to +14, a two point improvement). So Romney effectively did 1 point better than Obama. He trails in 275 electoral votes worth of states (RCP averages) by 5+ (Nevada + Obama's 269) so he's gonna need a lot more than 1 point.

  • Rifleman Salt Lake City, Utah
    Oct. 4, 2012 12:10 p.m.

    Re: atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    "One thing that is patently clear in the debate... Romney is not honest and thinks Americans can't do math."

    If true then Obama should have capitalized on Romney's math. The question now is whether this is all the punch Obama's got? Undecided voters certainly weren't impressed with what he had to offer last night.

  • JimInSLC Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 4, 2012 12:20 p.m.

    I think Romney did a good job during the debates. Some have said that Romney came across as bullying Obama. Obama was not as strong because he realized that the progress over the last 4 years is hard to defend. I don't want Obama re-elected, but I still have a lot of reservations about Romney. Romney as president will be like Bush w/o the comedic moments. I want a president that will get out of these wars the US is involved in around the world. Under Romney I think these wars will drag on for many more years. Another thing that concerns me is Romney's list of possible replacements for the Sec. of Treasury, The guys that contributed to the economic mess that the country is in he wants to put back into positions where they can screw things up more. John Thain? Seriously Mitt? David Walker, former US comptroller general would be a good choice.

  • Salsa Libre Provo, UT
    Oct. 4, 2012 12:21 p.m.

    Since candidates, surrogates, media types, and pundits are fast-and-easy with rumors, stories, lies, and out-right lies, you need the fact-checkers and a little times to reflect on what is said to make any sense of what is being said.

    How do you know someone is telling you the truth. You certainly can't depend upon them and simply have faith. Taking someone's word is tantamont to becoming complicit in the fraud. It takes effort to sift through the mess. And because one side may add to the mess doesn't mean it's okay for the other side to make a mess. But recognize the mess for what it is and sweep it aside and don't just step in it.

  • jsf Centerville, UT
    Oct. 4, 2012 1:59 p.m.

    Truthseeker "Romney's plan: A $5 trillion tax reduction" Romney said no that is not true. Obama conceded with "Okay"

  • Counter Intelligence Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 4, 2012 2:27 p.m.

    "Obama should just promise pie-in-the-sky too.
    And lie."

    And this would be different from the last four years how?

  • WHAT NOW? Saint George, UT
    Oct. 4, 2012 2:28 p.m.

    Which Mitt Romney?

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    Oct. 4, 2012 2:36 p.m.

    re:JSF
    Romney has proposed cutting personal federal income tax rates across the board by 20 percent, in addition to extending the tax cuts enacted early in the Bush administration. He also proposes to eliminate the estate tax permanently, repeal the Alternative Minimum Tax, and eliminate taxes on interest, capital gains and dividends for taxpayers making under $200,000 a year in adjusted gross income.

    By themselves, those cuts would, according to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, lower federal tax liability by “about $480 billion in calendar year 2015” compared with current tax policy, with Bush cuts left in place. Extrapolated that figure out over 10 years, coming up with a $5 trillion figure over a decade.

    Romney can't/won't explain how he could offset such a large loss of revenue.

    There isn't enough revenue to be gained from closing loopholes that only target the rich to make up the lost revenue from Romney’s rate cut.

    As for the 6 studies cited by Romney which purportedly back up his claims, only 1 as non-partisan and 2 were blogs. The 1 non-partisan "study" assumed real GDP growth greater than during Bush's.

  • WHAT NOW? Saint George, UT
    Oct. 4, 2012 2:45 p.m.

    The $5,000,000,000,000 tax reduction is Primary Mitt Romney.

    The denial is Reset, Reboot, Etch-a-Sketch Mitt Romney.

  • deseret pete robertson, Wy
    Oct. 4, 2012 2:45 p.m.

    Obama didn't say any thing he was going to do to create jobs, except spend more tax dollars.The few green jobs that were created are now pretty much gone and they cost the taxpayer about 500000 per job.No one evan mentioned the train barrelling down the track in 2014 from Obama care that will crash right into our wallets.We can not afford this boy trying to do a mans work -- He doesn't have a clue.

  • Craig Clark Boulder, CO
    Oct. 4, 2012 2:49 p.m.

    jsf,

    "Truthseeker "Romney's plan: A $5 trillion tax reduction" Romney said no that is not true. Obama conceded with "Okay"

    ==========

    I don't recall Obama saying "okay" but he is not making that stuff up out of nowhere. Romney was emphatic that he was not proposing a $5 trillion tax cut but that’s the figure the Tax Policy Center computed based on the 20% income tax cut proposal Romney has been making and is still making. Not exactly an Honest Abe moment for Mitt.

  • Meadow Lark Mark IDAHO FALLS, ID
    Oct. 4, 2012 4:03 p.m.

    Hopefully for the next two debates they can get the teleprompter set up for Obama!!!

  • athought Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 4, 2012 4:27 p.m.

    Maybe for the next debate the "chair" will show up. Would be as charasmatic???

  • I M LDS 2 Provo, UT
    Oct. 4, 2012 6:47 p.m.

    Telepromters and empty chairs...

    So funny.

    How about at the next debate Romney is hooked up to polygraph technology!

  • Flying Finn Murray, UT
    Oct. 4, 2012 8:15 p.m.

    @ I M LDS 2 writes:
    How about at the next debate Romney is hooked up to polygraph technology!

    How about we hook both candidates up to a polygraph, or do you think President Obama should get a free pass on who he had to bribe to get Obamacare passed?

  • Nate Pleasant Grove, UT
    Oct. 4, 2012 8:19 p.m.

    @Mad Hatter "Nonetheless, two debates remain."

    Weird. I just started salivating.

  • Bee Careful Kaysville, UT
    Oct. 4, 2012 9:23 p.m.

    One of the commentators made the point that Mr. Romney appeared to be a teacher in the debate and Mr. Obama a callow student. A more apt metaphor might be Romney as CEO, Obama as a Jr. Executive called on the carpet to be fired for committing too many blunders and breaking too many promises. Romney was explaining to the failed Jr. that he can no longer tolerate the faux pas since they threaten to bring down the whole enterprise: "Mr. Obama, you record as an executive is abominable. You have not kept any of the promises you made when you were promoted. You have recklessly spent scarce resources and amassed a unacceptable debt, with no positive results. You have created a negative atmosphere for all concerned. You have taken too many vacations when you should have stayed at your desk.... and YOU'RE FIRED!

  • LoveLife Riverton, UT
    Oct. 4, 2012 9:57 p.m.

    I M LDS 2,
    No offense, but you have a strange way of reading numbers. By your reasoning, 78% of undecideds didn't declare Obama the winner of the debate. That seems like a bad night for the President to me.

    Since there were three options given for answers, 46% is pretty strong. You also only cite one poll. A poll from CNN had Romney winning 67%-25%-the highest number CNN has ever recorded in a debate. Now it is being reported that 70 million people watched it, too.

    Perhaps the strongest sign that the President performed so badly is that Bill Maher tweeted, "I can't believe I'm saying this but Obama DOES look like he needs a teleprompter" and "Obama made a lot of great points tonight. Unfortunately, most of them were for Romney."

    It's okay-I'm sure it was a long evening for you and other Obama supporters.

  • A Scientist Provo, UT
    Oct. 4, 2012 11:30 p.m.

    LoveLife

    No, my way of looking at numbers is just fine... given the fact that this election is Obama's to lose. Romney cannot win it himself. Obama must really screw something up for Romney to even have a glimmer of a chance - just look at the electoral college analyses you can find pretty much anywhere.

    As such, anyone - especially "undecideds" - who vote either tie or Obama are essentially and effectively voting FOR Obama and AGAINST Romney.

    Hope that makes more sense now.

  • JJL Eugene, OR
    Oct. 5, 2012 12:14 a.m.

    Will Biden even show up to the VP debate? At least he won't be able to blame his poor performance on the altitude!

  • Bebyebe UUU, UT
    Oct. 5, 2012 8:28 a.m.

    "The place you put your money makes a pretty clear indication where your heart is!" -- Mitt Romney

    Best line of the night. Off shore banks is Romney's love.

  • ksampow Farr West, Utah
    Oct. 5, 2012 9:00 a.m.

    IM LDS 2: You sure twist the facts. 46-22 is a clear win no matter how many other scoring attempts failed. And the CNN poll showed more than 70% declaring Romney the winner.

    atl134: You totally missed the point: closing tax loopholes while lowering tax rates is a balanced approach that will not raise taxes across the board. And you ignor4ed the fact that a stronger economy brings more tax revenue without raising tax rates. When the reagan tax cuts were passed, tax rates went down but total tax revenues went up. Tthe only reason there was still a deficit was the military expenditures that WON the cold war - causing the collapse of the Soviet Union that didn't have the economic strength to keep up.)

  • patriot Cedar Hills, UT
    Oct. 5, 2012 4:04 p.m.

    oh my gosh - is this an actual video of Chris Mathews? Holy geez - Mr sleaze himself along with his other MSNBC bad guys. Listening to some of the clips from these shady characters after the debate was akin to listening to ole "Baghdad Bob" the former Iraqi propaganda minister after the American invasion. "I see no US tanks in the compound" - tanks were actually over running the entire city at that moment! Hilarious!! MSNBC and Chris Mathews have the credibility of professional wrestling so considering any opinion from this bunch of rabble is a waste of brain cells. Mitt did great - as expected. Obama was a joke - as expected. No surprise here.

  • Stephen Kent Ehat Lindon, UT
    Oct. 6, 2012 5:05 a.m.

    @ I M LDS 2

    You state, and I quote:

    "Romney 'won'? Not necessarily. Take, for example, a CBS poll of undecided voters. 46% of them said Romney won; 22% said Obama won; but 32% said it was a tie! That makes fully 54% who either picked Obama or said 'tie.' Romney's 46% hardly constitutes a blowout."

    End quote.

    Cute. And that also makes fully 78% who either picked Romney or said "tie." Romney's 78% hardly constitutes a blowout, either, I suppose.

  • Stephen Kent Ehat Lindon, UT
    Oct. 6, 2012 5:25 a.m.

    You decide:

    Obama:

    21:10:50 -- "Governor Romney's central economic plan calls for a $5 trillion tax cut."

    Romney:

    21:11:03 -- "I don't have a $5 trillion tax cut."

    Obama:

    21:16:00 -- "Governor Romney's proposal that he has been promoting for 18 months calls for a $5 trillion tax cut."

    21:16:36 -- "You don't come close to paying for $5 trillion in tax cuts."

    Romney:

    21:16:44 -- "So if the tax plan he described were a tax plan I was asked to support, I'd say absolutely not. I'm not looking for a $5 trillion tax cut. . . . There's no economist that can say Mitt Romney's tax plan adds $5 trillion . . . ."

    Obama:

    21:22:58 -- "If you believe that we can cut taxes by $5 trillion . . . then Governor Romney's plan may work for you."

    Romney:

    21:24:50: "Let me -- let me repeat -- let me repeat what I said. I'm not in favor of a $5 trillion tax cut. That's not my plan. . . . So you may keep referring to it as a $5 trillion tax cut, but that's not my plan."

  • patriot Cedar Hills, UT
    Oct. 8, 2012 12:33 p.m.

    re:Stephen Kent Ehat

    67% said Romney won the debate. A focus group afterward - comprised of 70% democrats - all but one said Romney won and even more interesting the majority of the focus group said they were now voting for Romney. All these folks voted for Barack in 2008.

    Look around you. Listen to what is going on. Team Obama is in FULL PANIC mode at this point. Do you really think these lying dirt bags would be in panic mode had they won?