Romney obliterates Obama in first debate

by NW Spotlight

Romney wins debate – 67% say Romney won in CNN poll (only 25% say Obama won)

CNN is reporting that a CNN/ORC International survey taken right after the debate had 67% of debate watchers saying Romney won, and only 25% saying Obama won.

430 adults were surveyed: 37% of the people who took the survey were Democrats, 33% were Republicans and 29% were independents.

Update: More than 67 million people watched the first debate, a 32-year record. By comparison, 52 million viewers tuned in to watch the first presidential debate in 2008.

Click here for the full debate schedule.

GOP debate highlights video “Smirk”:

Post to Twitter Post to Facebook Post to LinkedIn Post to Reddit

Posted by at 09:59 | Posted in 2012 Presidential Election, Mitt Romney, President Obama | 69 Comments |Email This Post Email This Post |Print This Post Print This Post
  • The only thing left was a puff of smoke.

  • Bob Clark

    If we could just run ads with the the mug shots of both as above over and over until the election, I think Romney might win. Romney did control the moderator, and seem the hungriest of the two. Hope Romney can repeat the performance of tonight through the next two debates.
    I did like Obama’s blue tie.
    Obama’s no bland sweater wearing Jimmy Carter, and this makes it tougher for Romney than Reagan’s challenge of Carter.

  • Judahlevi

    Obama had no successes to point toward so he made the comment that it is not the last four years which are important, but the next four. Yes, he would love to have Americans develop amnesia about his first term in office. His whole campaign of “Forward” is about forgetting the last four years (other than also being a popular communist party slogan).

    It won’t happen – it shouldn’t happen – and he is a pathetic president for recommending it.

    • oregongrown

      Judah:
      Re: “Obama had no successes to point toward so he made the comment that it is
      not the last four years which are important, but the next four.”
      That was a definite strategy that backfired. Of course he didn’t want to talk about his four years at the helm, but we did. And Romney has a fair right to question the years Obama was in charge.

      • DavidAppell

        Obama has presided over one of the greatest bull markets in history: the S&P500 up 69% since his inauguration, and all US markets up $6.7 trillion in value.

        Corporate profits at record levels:
        http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/CP/

        • Judahlevi

          David, if we wanted your “talking points”, we would go to the Huffington Post. Since when does a lefty like you cheer for the stock market when unemployment is over 8% for the last three years and 23 million people are either unemployed or underemployed. Where is your compassion for them?

          Capitalists cheer for the stock market and corporate earnings, not socialists like you.

          • DavidAppell

            A lot of people have been making a lot of money in the stock market: $6.7 trillion since Obama has been in charge.

            That’s money the “job creators” will pour back into the economy, right? Isn’t that how its supposed to work? Isn’t that why we give them a big break on capital gains taxes?

          • Judahlevi

            David, your training is obviously not in economics or finance. You see the world your way, I see it with eyes wide open. You might want to play your games somewhere else.

          • DavidAppell

            Stock market wealth has soared. Corporate profits are up sharply.
            So where are the jobs?

          • Judahlevi

            That is a good question. Why don’t you ask Obama?

          • valley person

            Why don’t you ask Mitt why he doesn’t repatriate some of his overseas wealth and hire a few more pool boys and butlers?

          • DavidAppell

            Because I’m asking you. I realize it’s a difficult question for people like you, that the data contradicts a major leg of your economic philosophy. And I see you avoiding the question, because, I suspect, you have no answer.

          • Judahlevi

            This flimsy amount of data contradicts nothing. It is your hero’s responsibility to create an economic environment which stimulates jobs. He is not doing it – and he should be fired for not doing it.

          • DavidAppell

            >>This flimsy amount of data contradicts nothing. It is your hero’s responsibility to create an economic environment which stimulates jobs. He is not doing it – and he should be fired for not doing it.<<

            Jobs *are* being created: there are 3.9 million more private sector jobs than in July 2009.

            Employment fell by 0.9 M in Bush's first term, and rose by only 0.3 M in his second. There's no comparison.

          • Judahlevi

            “So where are the jobs?” – David

            “Jobs *are* being created: there are 3.9 million more private sector jobs than in July 2009.” – David

            David, you need to make up your mind which direction you want to go with this. I know liberal minds use convoluted logic, but this is ridiculous.

          • DavidAppell

            You’re the one complaining there has not enough job creation. I’m simply showing you that data that refutes that.

            There’s also been an enormous amount of wealth created in US stock markets since Obama took office. And corporate profits are at record highs.

            This all after Bush created the greatest financial calamity since the Great Depression. But you want to return to the policies of that time, in spite of all the data that shows things are much, much better now.

          • ardbeg

            You really think you see the world with your eyes wide open? I’d say your world view is very narrow. Everyone who doesn’t agree with you is a liberal, socialist, nazi or what ever other name you feel in the mood to sling. Everyone else is so stupid, if they would just see things as clearly as you do the world would be perfect. Right? What about backing Gary Johnson? Or do you just drink the two party cool-aide? You guys rail against the “lame stream”, ‘Liberal”, “what ever you call it” media. When will you figure out the media is playing you the fool? Never obviously, as long as there is some media source that plays you like a fiddle.

          • Judahlevi

            You are entitled to your opinion even if you are wrong. Everyone who doesn’t agree with you is narrow-minded. Right.

            As you know, it is insulting for anyone to imply that some “media source” controls our thoughts because we don’t have minds of our own. But your liberal media has no effect on your mind.

            You live in your own black and white world.

          • 3H

            Yet you accuse liberals of group-think, of not having any original ideas, and of being proto-fascists and totalitarians, Black and white indeed.

          • Judahlevi

            3h, and you feel anyone who doesn’t agree with your analysis has a “warped” view. I guess only your view is not warped. You also have your own black and white world.

          • 3H

            Nope, not anyone.. it just depends upon the specific circumstances. I think people who assign characteristics to a broad group are engaged, in that instance, in warped thinking. That goes for left or right, you or me. To me, anyone saying that liberals engage in group think, etc… is being intellectually lazy. I think they know better, they just don’t choose to acknowledge that the world is much more varied and complex (thank God) than they will admit.

          • Judahlevi

            That is your opinion, 3h, it is not fact. I can just as easily say you are engaged in “warped thinking” since your worldview doesn’t agree with mine. To be honest, your view isn’t warped and my view isn’t warped – they are just different. The word “warped” should never have been used.

            Anyone of you guys, David, valley, etc. are crazy if you came here thinking you are changing anyone’s political opinions. You won’t have any “gotcha” moments with anyone other than in your own minds.

            I came here to share thoughts with fellow conservatives, not run into more groupthink talking points with liberals. I get enough of that just living in Oregon.

          • 3H

            “That is your opinion, 3h, it is not fact. I can just as easily say you are engaged in “warped thinking” since your worldview doesn’t agree with mine.”

            Why of course you can.

            “The word “warped” should never have been used.”

            That is just your opinion

            “Anyone of you guys, David, valley, etc. are crazy if you came here thinking you are changing anyone’s political opinions. You won’t have any “gotcha” moments with anyone other than in your own minds.

            That, too, is just your opinion.

            “I came here to share thoughts with fellow conservatives, not run into more groupthink talking points with liberals. I get enough of that just living in Oregon.”

            That is your motivation. Mine is different. I would suggest, again, that if you want a site devoid of liberal opinion and thought you either get the owner of this site to expressly state that, or… you create your own site and set your own rules.

            I find the term groupthink to be even more hideous than warped. You don’t practice group think, I don’t practice group think.. we just think differently. I think the phrase “group think” is even more hideous than the word “warped.”

            At the end of the day, your opinion about who should be allowed to post on this site, unless you can convince the owner(s) differently, carries no more weight than mine. Which is why I ignore you — it’s not your site, you don’t make the rules. That is a fact, by the way, not an opinion.

          • Judahlevi

            It is also a “fact” that the site description is for “conservatives to gather”, not liberals with other agendas. You don’t qualify as a conservative. By that description, you should not be here.

            I am in discussions with ownership of the site and we will see where it goes.

            In the meantime, until I hear something unique from you, valley, David, ardbeg, that is not just typical liberal talking points, I will continue to call your thoughts groupthink. I disagree that the description is worse than “warped” since it has a more neutral value definition and warped is definitely negative.

            And yes, that is my opinion – whether you like it or not.

          • 3H

            Ahhh! But your contention that I don’t qualify as a conservative is only your opinion.
            Well.. since your views seem to be typically conservative , you’ll understand why I think your thoughts are as much group think as anyone’s. I mean really, your bit about Democrats being totalitarians and the Nazis being leftists comes right out of Jonah Goldberg. That’s not very original (and still wrong) don’t you think?

          • Judahlevi

            You have already self-identified as not being conservative. It is not just my opinion.

            And yes, you can turn the tables and say that conservatives are engaged in “groupthink.” Not very original or clever, but you can.

            No, I will never agree that conservatives in Oregon engage in groupthink. The definition of the word implies some peer pressure to conform to. Conservatives in Oregon don’t have that kind of pressure, in fact, just the opposite. If we were being lazy, we would just go along with the liberal groupthink in the state.

          • 3H

            I did.. but upon further reflection, I have decided that I was wrong, and that I am a conservative. Political labels, as all things political, are simply matters of opinion, and there are very few, if any, facts involved – that is at least what you claimed. Now that I’ve self-identified as a conservative, that means I am one, right? Not perhaps by your definition, but since your definition is only your opinion, you will understand why I will give greater weight to mine. I refuse to be bound and boxed in by group think, and accepting standard definitions of conservatism would only be engaging in a form of group think. You have claimed that conservatism is all about individualism… what could be more individualistic than self-defining myself on the political spectrum? So I have at least met one of your criteria for being a conservative. Are there others that I am lacking?

            Now that I am a conservative, I belong on this site.

            What about conservatives in other states where they are the majority… in a, say, Arizona. Are conservatives there being lazy and going along with the group think there? Even if they have the same views as conservatives in Oregon? They are not lazy in Oregon, but they are lazy in Arizona?

            Or are all liberals, in your opinion, lazy? Regardless if they are the majority in a state or not?

          • Judahlevi

            No, you don’t belong on this site. You are rambling. You must have better things to do than keep this up – or are you just someone who always has to have the last word?

          • 3H

            I do belong on this site… I am a conservative. Actually, and to be honest, I do have a problem with not responding to the last comment. It’s not that I necessarily want to have the last word, but I feel the need to further explain myself. It takes a conscious act to not respond. Which I obviously failed at this time.

          • ardbeg

            If your eyes are so wide open tell me then where you differ from the GOP? Or do you support their agenda 100%?

          • Judahlevi

            I don’t agree with anyone 100%. Don’t bother to ask where the differences are. I am not going to play that game.

          • ardbeg

            Those differences, and I don’t believe by your posts that you have any, are a chance to engage others in a discussion. If all you continuously do is praise the GOP as all knowing and the Dems as Anti-american, then you sound like someone who drank the kool-aide. Your sounding more and more like Joelinpdx all the time.

          • Judahlevi

            I don’t know who “joelinpdx” is, but if they share my philosophy, he/she must have been a good person.

            I am not trying to engage in discussion and, frankly, I don’t care whether you agree with me or not. I will never convince you, David, 3h, valley, or any other liberal that I am right and you are wrong. You guys are just as set in your views as I am or anyone else here.

          • ardbeg

            “I am not trying to engage in discussion”-then what the heck are you doing on a blog!? If not to discuss. What’s your point of being here. You never answered my question. Why not vote for Gary Johnson? Does Mitt have better ideas?

          • Judahlevi

            A vote for Gary Johnson is a vote for Barack. Romney has better ideas than Barack.

          • ardbeg

            Romney hasn’t hasn’t had ‘a better idea” since he tied his dog to the top of his car. He changes his position more often than normal people change their socks and you are on your last sip of the kool-aide. How can any self respecting conservative pick Romney over Johnson. Do you have any idea what this guys ‘ideas’ have been over the last 20 years????And how is a vote for Johnson a vote for Obama? A vote for Johnson is a vote against Mitt and all his BS. Mitt came off more liberal than Barack at the first debate if that’s even possible. He trying to reinvent (a.k.a.-get more people to vote for him) for the nth time. Who the heck did he think he was fooling? Oh ya, stupid people!! Keep singing their tune and playing their game but don’t think that your a ‘capitalist’ and a ‘conservative’ just because you talk their talk and say that you are. It takes more than just speaking the lingo pal!

          • Judahlevi

            Feel better now that you have ranted and called Romney supporters “stupid.” You are a bright one. I am sure that Gary Johnson has a terrific chance of becoming president. I am also positive that you have done the political analysis and know this for a fact.

            Let’s just play devil’s advocate and say he doesn’t make it – not possible in your mind – but go with me on this. If a conservative votes for Johnson instead of Romney, that means Romney gets less votes. Romney getting less votes means that Obama wins. Therefore, the conservative vote might as well have been cast for Obama since it has the same outcome.

            Surely a political scientist like you should know this.

          • ardbeg

            Thanks for the freshman 101 analysis, when you get your masters degree maybe we can have a conversation. Remember just a few short months ago when all the prospective nominee’s were saying Romney really isn’t a conservative? Well, they were right! Yet now he is your guy? For all his life Romney has been a social and fiscal moderate. He changes his tune when it comes election time and he is obviously willing to pander to the kool-aide drinking fools like you. Romney has the ‘I’ve changed my position after carefull reflection’ speech down pat. The truth is his is very moderate in his beliefs but will say anything to get the funding from the far right and to make sure he gets the base vote. The truth is Romney could have run as a democrate and been just as successful. During the nomination process he tried to make himself as “conservative” as possible to win the nomination, now he will try and make himself as moderate as possible to not lose the undecided, independent vote. Moral of the story is this guy has change color so many times in the last 25 years his nickname is the ‘le cameleon’. The ‘le’ is his attempt to get the hispanic vote I’m sure. He and Obama are both tails on a trick coin. So which is it? Your going to sellout your vote knowing a vote for Johnson is like throwing a pitch in the third row cause he has no chance to win but he really is a conservative, or you will vote for a total moderate willing to say anything (LIE) because he is better than the other guy. A vote for Romney is a sellout for a real conservative!

          • Idiots Vote for Johnson

            Only an imbecile would vote for Gary Johnson because Romney isn’t conservative enough for them. Your choices, like it or not, are Obama or Romney. With Romney you get 60 – 70% of what you want, but with Obama you get 0%. Do the math Mr. Master’s degree.

          • ardbeg

            Fact is I don’t like it and would vote for my cat before I’d vote for multiple faced Romney. Rather vote for someone I believe in than drink the two party kool-aide. A vote for romney isn’t really any different than a vote for Obama. Both are losers.

          • DavidAppell

            Romney is indeed the master flip-flopper, who doesn’t appear to have a principled bone in his being. He lied in the debate (about, among other things, his plan’s coverage of pre-existing conditions). People who vote for him will be voting for a known liar, and they will have no right to complain when the lying continues if he gets in office — as of course it will.

  • Rupert in Springfield

    For Romney it was “Game On” for Obama it was 4:20.

  • DavidAppell

    It’s easy to appear to win a debate if you lie about your positions.

    Romney: “…it’s a lengthy description, but number one, pre-existing conditions are covered under my plan.”

    In fact, they aren’t, as a Romney adviser admitted after the debate:
    http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/10/top-romney-adviser-states-will-have-to-cover-people-with-pre-existing-conditions-under-president-rom.php?ref=fpa

  • valley person

    He “won” by acting like a Democrat. He passed a comp health care bill WITH DEMOCRATS. He loves teachers. He wants to restore the mean cuts Obama made to Medicare. He wants to keep Dodd-Frank except for the part that protects the big banks (I guess he has joined Occupy). And he wants to keep all of Obamacare except the parts where anybody has to pay anything. And God forbid he would cut taxes on the rich. No way. Not him. Read his lips.

    The only Republican thing he said all night was wanting to cut off funding for Big Bird.

    Heck, if Romney keeps this up then I might vote for him myself.

    • Judahlevi

      Your guy lost, valley. Get over it.

      • valley person

        My guy lost to the guy who was more liberal. I can live with that. Can you?

        • Judahlevi

          I can live with Romney being president and getting rid of Obama all day long.

          • valley person

            I can also live with a moderate-liberal Romney as president just fine. So we finally agree on something.

          • ardbeg

            So not that Romney is a conservative, but he is better than the other guy. Great. Poser! This site is not for you, go to Blue Oregon!

      • DavidAppell

        “This Republican is proud to be the first governor to insure all his state’s citizens.”
        – Mitt Romney, op-ed, USA Today, 7/30/2009
        http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20090730/column30_st.art.htm

  • Pingback: Blue Coaster()

  • Pingback: Jody Kriss()

  • Pingback: DIRECTV packages()

  • Pingback: 3gp mobile porn()

  • Pingback: parking()

  • Pingback: water ionizer machine()

  • Pingback: water ionizer loans()

  • Pingback: parking()

  • Pingback: bottled alkaline water()

  • Pingback: Website for more fun()

  • Pingback: who is joe the plumber related to()

  • Pingback: w cope plumber nairn()

  • Pingback: house blue()

  • Pingback: electrician gloves klein()

  • Pingback: paypal loans()

  • Pingback: water ionizer payment plan()

  • Pingback: alkaline water()

  • Pingback: he has a good point()

  • Pingback: URL()

Stay Tuned...

Stay up to date with the latest political news and commentary from Oregon Catalyst through daily email updates:

Prefer another subscription option? Subscribe to our RSS Feed, become a fan on Facebook, or follow us on Twitter.

Twitter Facebook

No Thanks (close this box)