What advice would you give Obama and Romney for the next debate?

1. 94

   habeeposted 11 years ago

   To Obama, I'd say to be more engaged and show a little more passion. Act like you WANT to be POTUS for 4 more years.
   
   To Romney, I'd say, "Calm down!" I thought he did a good job in the last debate, but at times, he seemed almost manic.
   
   I'd also tell both to be completely truthful, but that would fall on deaf ears. lol

   replyreport
   1. 0

      JaxsonRaineposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I'd tell Obama to use his 'I'm talking to the congressional black caucus' accent... but my advice isn't meant to help him...
      
      I agree about the lying thing... I think the arguments that are known lies are meant more to stimulate the base than convince independents.

      replyreport
   2. 83

      kathleenkatposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      This.
      
      Also, if he could please smile and make eye contact with the person whom he is addressing. Those are the basic communication skills learned in kindergarten

      replyreport
   3. 60

      movingoutposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Romney Calm down? More like Lay out details and don't avoid the tough questions . (vouchers perhaps, abortion, jobs how,etc). Until he lays out his PLAN details, I don't see other then being confrontational, that anyone won the first debate. President Obama needs to lay out plan details as well!

      replyreport
   4. 77

      Uninvited Writerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      How about...be honest.

      replyreport
      1. 94

         habeeposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         Yeah, I said that - only I used the word "truthful." I think "honest politician" is pretty much an oxymoron, though. lol

         replyreport
   5. 60

      paintphdposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I'd advise Obama to hit hard on Romney's failed fiscal policies as Governor....Oh, he can't do that because he had a balanced budget as governor. Well then I'd advise Obama to go after him on Bain Capital....Oh, he can't go after him there either because he created jobs, even if a few were out sourced overseas. Obama has never created a job. Ok here it is...Obama should hit Romney on his 14% tax rate. But 14% of 12 million is 1.68 million and he gave more to charity than any two public servants in washington that has yet to come forward in challange. DAMN....I guess I'd just advise Obama to get Sandra Fluke to open for him and to stir the old ashes of the war on Tax payers paying for contraceptives and abortions,  code named "Womens Health". and Obama could even call up the one true person who has exemplified to the world, the morality and virtue's of an American President,  ole "Bubba" Bill Clinton. Bubba could explain to us how Obama will have a surplus just like him one great day, because he is mirroring the same policies he used; Obama just needs some more time man, "Obama did not have sex with the Stimulus" Slick Willy could say.  But If I were Obama I wouldn't let ole Slick Willy and Sandra Fluke get off alone together, some how Sandra would want to put the taxpayers on the hook to include dry cleaning of bodily fluids from clothing as a womens health issue. And another scandal right now would just distract from President Obama's stellar performance as Campaigner in Chief.

      replyreport
   6. 60

      paintphdposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      As for Romney I'd advise him to go after Obama on his failed economic policies. Policies that has taxed and regulated American business to the point of stifling job growth. Obama is quick to point to 18 tax cuts to businesses, but upon closer inspection the tax cuts are tied to those companies who wish to expand their operations. Virtually no business is poised for expansion in the current economic climate coupled with the uncertainties of Obama care. Maybe it would be better to go after Obama on his Vegas trip on 9/11/12 as our diplomat and four other Americans were being slaughtered in Benghazi after numerous requests for security. I don't know, maybe that would just get turned back on Romney again for speaking about it as he did while the crisis was in it's infancy. After all the President and his minions had already began sending out apologies to our close friend in Libya for that disrespectful video as the militants were still sodomizing the dead corpses with their rifle barrels. Romney may want to mention the cronie capitalizm that led to billions of stimulus dollars being used as risky "Green Energy" venture capitol for Obama campaign doner's. Romney should point out to Obama the 900 million that has thus far been lost in Obama's venture capitol gambles and how many firemen, policemen, and teachers that money could have financed. Romey should mention the fact that Obama's Auto industry and Banking bailout's which he is so eager to point out has proped up these corporate parasites on the backs of our grandchildren, amassing millions of dollars of debt to China that has not, nor ever will be repaid. The banking industry returned the favor to the American people by clamping down with restrictions that disqualifies most loan applicants. GM returned the favor by moving more of their operations to Mexico, Europe and Asia. Should he also mention that private exploration of oil has been nearly descimated by the Obama administrations regulations and fuel prices have doubled under his energy policies since he became president?  I don't Know, the left might say Romney was spiking the football.

      replyreport
      1. 60

         Josakposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         SOOOOOOO many things wrong.
         
         Firstly if you hope to be taken seriously learn the difference between million and billion it was 90 Billion which is not 900 million which is itself wrong because the actual figure is about a quarter of that and several of those businesses became successful furthermore recovery for much of that money is in process.  Were you wrong in like four ways on that one?
         
         The GM bailouts were not funded by loans to China or even foreign loans at all but even if they had been China owns a very small percentage of our debt (less than 15%) most of those bailouts are pretty much paid back too so them never being repaid seems rather unlikely.
         
         Are you aware that Bush had the highest oil price in recent history not Obama and that the price is once again falling?
         
         Ta breaks to encourage expansion are the whole point, otherwise lowering the tax rate accomplishes nothing at all, study of the American economic history shows that lowering taxes has historically coincided more with economic slow down than with economic growth, cuts where the incentive is on expansion on the other hand have produced positive results.
         
         I could go on... Just... Do some research.

         replyreport
   7. 65

      Ralph Deedsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      To Obama: Take the gloves off!
      To Romney: Drink only one can of Red Bull before the debate and try telling the truth for a change.

      replyreport
2. 0

   JaxsonRaineposted 11 years ago

   Oh, and I would tell Romney he needs to jump on this(next time domestic stuff comes up).
   
   http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-575 … -bankrupt/
   
   
   
   "Mr President, I have some news for you. GM and Chrysler both went bankrupt. The only difference is, they took at least $75 billion taxpayer dollars that will never be paid back before doing so."

   replyreport
   1. 65

      Ralph Deedsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      By "bankrupt" Obama obviously meant "go out of business," the commonly used meaning of the term. As usual you're trying unsuccessfully to make a mountain out of a mole hill.

      replyreport
      1. 0

         JaxsonRaineposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         Spinning, and redefining words. Bankrupt does not mean 'going out of business'. Bankrupt means you are insolvent.
         
         You never answered my question. Why do you give so much consideration to what Obama says, but not to Romney?
         
         You are perfectly willing to take something that Obama says, that is wrong, and say he meant to say something else, which is right. On the other hand, you take something Romney says, which is fine, and say he means something else, which is bad.

         replyreport
         1. 65

            Ralph Deedsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            As you well know, there are several different kinds of bankruptcy. Sometimes companies that are bankrupt go out of business. Sometimes they are successfully reorganized and emerge as viable enterprises, as in the case of GM and Chrysler.

            replyreport
   2. 73

      Quilligrapherposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Hi, Jaxson. Howzit goin’?
      
      There is something amiss with your $75B figure. “GM and Chrysler both went bankrupt. The only difference is, they took at least $75 billion taxpayer dollars that will never be paid back before doing so.” I do not think that is true.
      
      The $12.5B Chrysler deal involved a $7.1B loan plus a 9.9% equity position in the company. The loan has been repaid and Fiat, the new owner, purchased all of the government's stock. The US treasury recovered $11.2B leaving the final cost of the bailout at $1.3B.
      
      On the other hand, the government purchased 26.5% of GM for $49.5B. The stock is valued at $22.5B on the market today. {1}
      
      I suggest you double fact check your claim GM and Chrysler “took at least $75 billion taxpayer dollars that will never be paid back.” Actually, the total tab stands today at $28.3B. The worse case scenario could be $50.8B with the likelihood it will be much less in the final accounting.
      
      I also submit bankrupt does not mean “going out of business” nor does it mean “insolvent”. So, I guess you are both mistaken. Companies first become insolvent and then they file to go bankrupt by either going out of business or by reorganizing under Chapter 11 of the law. 
      
      Still, rather than quibbling over what the President “said” compared to what he “meant”, I prefer to look at what the President accomplished! He took positive action to save the companies while Gov. Romney’s solution was bankruptcy with the hope of finding private loans at the height of the financial crisis. Duh?
      
      Here we are, three years later.  Both companies are healthy, profitable, and selling more cars. After coming out of Chapter 11 in July 2009, GM profits are nearly $14B and Chrysler made about $440M. GM today employs 79,000 workers in the US and Chrysler has added 12,000 new jobs to bring their payroll up to 44,000. When you consider the new jobs created by automotive parts manufacturers and service providers, the Obama bailouts have added 156,000 to 780,700 new jobs in the automotive industry!  The current administration has earned a large share of the credit for this success.
      Q.
      {1} http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/ … story.html

      replyreport
      1. 65

         Ralph Deedsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         Thanks, Quill. Nothing like a few facts. The bottom line is that Obama's action saved GM and Chrysler and upwards of a million jobs. Romney's advice would have almost certainly have resulted in their demise and damage to Ford as well.

         replyreport
         1. 0

            JaxsonRaineposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            Or...
            
            GM could have just filed bankruptcy... the government could have helped anywhere that it was absolutely necessary... they could have restructured properly, without favoring any groups, and we could have required GM to pay its taxes, instead of giving them tax refunds.
            
            That would have saved, what... 8 months worth of operating losses for GM... probably about $20 billion.

            replyreport
      2. 0

         JaxsonRaineposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         Quill, you aren't counting the tax breaks the companies are getting. Let's use your $28.3 billion figure. GM is getting a tax break worth up to $45 billion, because it gets to carry-over losses that have been erased from its books. That brings us to $73.3 billion.
         
         To be fair, I usually say that GM will have taken between $50 and $75 billion when all is said and done, in reality the figure will probably fall somewhere between $50 and $100 billion, it's just impossible to tell at this point.

         replyreport
         1. 73

            Quilligrapherposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            Hello, Jaxson. Nice to see ya.
            
            Of course I did not count the $45B in tax loss carry-forwards. GM was entitled to those carry-over losses BEFORE the bailout. “The tax benefit stems from so-called tax-loss carry-forwards and other provisions, which allow companies to use losses in prior years and costs related to pensions and other expenses to shield profits from U.S. taxes for up to 20 years. In GM's case, the losses stem from years prior to when GM entered bankruptcy.” {1} That’s $45B in tax revenue the US would NEVER have collected anyway even if GM had not reorganized with government help.
            
            Arguments claiming this $45B is part of the cost of the bailout only serve those trying to make the bailout seem to be more costly then it really is. If the GM reorganization had been a typical arms-length commercial transaction these carry-over losses would have been subject to major restrictions. However, in this case, the new owner holding 61% of the company was the US government, a.k.a. American taxpayers. In a brilliant stroke of governance on the part of the current administration, it decided companies receiving US bailout money do not fall under this rule.
            
            Did the American people get a good deal with this decision to allow GM to carry forward their prior losses? They surely did! “The profit-shielding tax credit makes the bailed-out companies more attractive to investors, and that the value of the benefit is greater than the lost tax payments, especially since the tax payments would not exist if the companies fail,” said analysts close to this decision. (Underlining added){1} To which the Wall Street Journal added, “Investors typically view tax-loss carry-forward losses as important assets in bolstering a company's balance sheet.” This is a bonus for the Government and American taxpayers that is rooted in intangible investment realities and not in simple arithmetic.
            
            In the end, Jaxson, you replaced your original $95B with an equally fictitious $73.3B claim in a futile effort to discredit what has so far been one of the outstanding success stories of the Great Recession. 
            Q.
            {1}http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704462704575590642149103202.html

            replyreport
3. 70

   Teddletonmrposted 11 years ago

   Mr. Obama please explain why Americans should support your policies  that have made gas prices more than double what they were before your administration took office, it cost more to feed our families, and good paying jobs seem to be a thing of the past.
   Mr. Romney please whatever you do, do not allow Mr. Obama and his administration continue to cover-up, stone wall investigations and mislead the American people as to what really happened in Libya and the murder of the U.S ambassador and American patriots.

   replyreport
4. 0

   Motown2Chitownposted 11 years ago

   My advice would be not to participate in it. 
   
   Let your record stand on its own, Mr. President.  Governor Romney, do the same, and be transparent about what you plan to do if elected POTUS. 
   
   Other than that, my advice to both candidates at this point is to answer direct questions if they are posed to you or keep quiet. 
   
   Is that harsh?

   replyreport
5. 60

   Jo_Goldsmith11posted 11 years ago

   President Obama,
   
   Please outline for US your top three goals for the first 120 days after you
   get re elected? Would you please explain once again with detail and conviction ! ?  what you are going to do about Military men and women who need jobs when they come back from the war?
   
   Should you have the same *players* in Congress with a 7 % approval rating. How are you going to *lead this country* without their votes and support?
   
   Mr. Romney,
   
   Should you win this election. The folks who didn't vote for you because you helped to create disfranchised voters by  participating in creating laws to help YOU and the tea party radicals like your VP choice Mr. Ryan. How will you dispose of, get rid of  US?
   
   Are you going to "tie US to the top of your car too" ?

   replyreport
   1. 73

      Reality Bytesposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      With that premise, we need to be assured that Mr. Obama will not consume the U.S.
      
      
      
      WASHINGTON -- When conservatives discovered that President Obama admitted to having eaten dog meat as a child when he lived in Indonesia, they vowed to bring it up any time the other side dared mention Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney's mistreatment of his dog in 1983.
      
      http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/3 … 64749.html
      
      

      replyreport
      1. 60

         Jo_Goldsmith11posted 11 years agoin reply to this

         You are a hoot!  Are you nervous because President Obama once ate a bird your size? He likes fowl, it makes him stronger

         replyreport
         1. 73

            Reality Bytesposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            I knew it, Barack would not fire Big Bird, he would eat him! 
            
            

            replyreport
            1. 94

               habeeposted 11 years agoin reply to this

               eeewwwwwwwwwwwwww

               replyreport
            2. 60

               Jo_Goldsmith11posted 11 years agoin reply to this

               You are Priceless! I tip my hat off to you and leave you some bird seed!

               replyreport
6. 61

   readytoescapeposted 11 years ago

   Obama shouldn't show up. Treat the debate like his reaction to the assination of our Ambassador, ignore it like it isn't happening and head back to Vegas. It might be his last opportunity to party on Air Force One.

   replyreport
7. 60

   movingoutposted 11 years ago

   Mr. Romney tell us details about your plans? I can count to 5 as can everyone else. I want details on 1 thru 5? Mr. President engage more with details to your plans as well.

   replyreport
8. 65

   maxoxam41posted 11 years ago

   Not to debate, it's a good advice!

   replyreport
9. 69

   Cody Hodge5posted 11 years ago

   Advice For Obama:
   
   Hammer Romney on his inability to create jobs as Mass. governor
   
   Highlight the fact that all states have to have a balanced budget if it comes up. It isn't something special that Romney did.
   
   Generally, don't worry about the 20 percent or so of the electoral votes that you aren't going to win. They think you are a socialist Muslim from Kenya. You can't convince them otherwise.
   
   Otherwise, just attack, attack and attack some more. Apparently these debates are won or lost based on style as opposed to substance.
   
   Make the 47 percent speech an issue. It's clear that he wants people to buy into the perception that most Americans are lazy. Sadly, he believes that this is just a "liberal" issue.
   
   Advice For Romney:
   
   -What deductions and exemptions are on the table regarding your tax plan? Until he makes some concrete statements, it's hard to believe he can get it done without spending 5 trillion dollars.
   
   -You have a five point plan for stimulating the economy? That's cool, so did Bush and McCain. How are you actually going to implement it?
   
   -In other words, details, details, details.

   replyreport
   1. 60

      paintphdposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Any attack on Romney's numbers as Governor. will expose Obama's under belly to Romney, allowing Romney to fire back any number of failures. A couple right off the top might be the fact that he did'nt run for Governor on the promise of having  6% unemployment in his first term, and he'd be a one term governor if his economic policies tanked, as did Obama.  Romney could also site the fact that Obama's 2012 budget proposal was viewed so unserious, that it garnered not a single vote in the House (97-0) or the Senate (414-0).

      replyreport
      1. 60

         movingoutposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         Or perhaps the money he's making off of his blind trusts, invested in China? Oh that's right, he against China! lmao

         replyreport
      2. 73

         Quilligrapherposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         Howdy Paint. I hope you don’t mind my jumping in here to correct an error.
         
         Your attempt to “site the fact that Obama's 2012 budget proposal was viewed so unserious [sic], that it garnered not a single vote in the House (97-0) or the Senate (414-0)” is a gross distortion that totally misrepresents actual events.
         
         You should really take the time to check the facts. The president’s recommended 2012 budget was decimated by republican amendments and no longer represented the President’s proposal. Of course, no Democrat could vote for it. 
         
         Here is the truth as reported by ABC News: “Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Miss., introduced a budget amendment representing the president’s budget request; the Sessions amendment was voted down 99-0. A similar effort from Rep. Mick Mulvaney, R-SC, was rejected in the House 414-0.” {1}
         
         Senator Sessions feigned being stunned because no one voted for “his” version of the Obama budget. Much like Gov. Romney’s tax “plan” with no specifics to support his conclusions, Sen. Sessions’ budget amendment was a shell of hot air. From the ABC News account: “While the Sessions and Mulvaney bills put forward the same topline numbers as those in the president’s budget, neither offered any specifics. The Sessions legislation was 56 pages long; actual budgets are closer to 2,000 pages long." Once again, the unanimous Republican Congress delivered gimmicks instead of substance.
         
         Fortunately, Gov. Romney’s campaign does not rely on your false and misleading statements. In fact, neither should you!
         Q.
         {1} http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/20 … r-do-they/

         replyreport
         1. 60

            paintphdposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            Sure someone else is always to blame for his failure as a leader. He had no problem getting his signature bill passed (Obama Care). He owned the house and the Senate for his first two years remember. You guys who want to defend this failed president should throw out all the he said she said and loose your Google button, you'll always find a self serving answer in that parallel universe. Try this for a change of pace, Look at the Governments own numbers instead of Googling your spin on the facts. SIXTEEN TRILLION DEFICIT WITH NO PLANS OF REDUCING IT.
                      23 MILLION UNEMPLOYED WITH NO PLAN OF REDUCING IT.
                      47 MILLION ON FOOD STAMPS WITH NO PLANS TO REDUCE IT.
                       1 IN 6 PEOPLE IN AMERICA ARE AT POVERTY LEVEL AND NO PLAN TO REDUCE IT.
                       HEALTH CARE COST ARE $2,500 HIGHER THAN WHEN OBAMA TOOK OFFICE.
                        FAMILY INCOMES ARE DOWN ON AVERAGE OF AROUND $4.000 DOLLARS.
                        HOME VALUES ARE AT AN ALL TIME LOW WITH NO PLANS TO TURN THEM AROUND.
            And all your President can do is send his minions out to hype a "Big Bird "or a "Binder full of Women" campaign add. It's amazing that adult's fall for the play ground name calling and immature psychology of stirring people up about somebody having something they don't or making them believe somebody doesn't like them because their not good enough to be their friend, and they cannot relate to you because they have so much more than you; those boy's don't like girls, that white boy don't like black's. I thought all that was left behind in 5th grade man. I heard him talk about your mama and my daddy can whip your daddy is for little kid's....Com'on Man!!!  For cryin out loud can't they all go curl up to their "Honey Boo Boo" episode or "The View" and off with trying to convince sane folks of this Presidents stellar performance as President.

            replyreport
            1. 73

               Quilligrapherposted 11 years agoin reply to this

               Howdy once more, Paint.
               Despite the length, there is nothing in your last reply to me regarding the President's 2012 budget. I will take that as an admission that your remarks about the congressional voting record was distorting and misrepresenting the actual events. {1} Since that was the only point I made, I'm happy you agree.
               Q.
               {1} http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/104803? … ost2230407

               replyreport
      3. 60

         movingoutposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         Paint, do yourself a favor and do a google search on morman, living prophet and planet kolob. You might be shocked with the results! Hey but what the heck. A vote for Romney gets two for the price of one! The living prophet speaks for God and leads the congregation as God wants it! So if the living prophet says go to way, a prez romney will have to agree! After all, the prophet speaks for God! And so many had so much to say about Rev. Wright when Obama first ran! lmao

         replyreport
         1. 60

            paintphdposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            Do yourself a favor and go back to your room in your moma's basement and practice your religious bigotry on a site where others of your ilk can discuss it.

            replyreport
10. 60

    paintphdposted 11 years ago

    Romney should embrace the 47% issue. On it's face it's just as truthful to say that the 47% of Americans who will vote for Obama like's being cared for by goverment entitlements and government intrusion into their lives as it was for the Presidents Campaign to say that those voting for the GOP candidates were in favor of dirty air, dirty water and throwing granny over the cliff for wanting to ease government regulations on conventional energy and overhaul the medicaid system in an attempt to save it. Pelosi said the GOP was the "E.coli" party because the GOP was against the farm bill which has provisions for government to hire thousands of so called "nutritionist" into school cafeteria's, pumping millions into union coffers, so why get so defencive? The only Gaff in Romney's statement was his failing to point out that 20% of those in his statistics were military and retired citizens who doesn't contribute taxes, but they still do not pay any taxes; and in business, if it's not producing positive revenue it falls into the liability column. So that being said Romney's statement was fact. Much of American society has become lazy. The idea of taking government help formerly reserved for the needy, and allowing it to become one's career income isn't conducive to a healthy society. To hell with explaining how Romney will cut taxes without explaining how it will be paid for. Let Obama explain how the welfare state he's fostered will be paid! The half of society left to pay the way for those seeking free government handouts will eventually be taxed into extinction.

    replyreport
    1. 65

       Ralph Deedsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Romney lumped them all together as irresponsible moochers. Subsequently, Ryan reduced the percentage of "takers" to 30 percent.

       replyreport
11. 61

    eternals3ptemberposted 11 years ago

    Obama: Drink a five-hour energy and run out with ACDC blaring, fire shooting from the door, screaming "are you @$&%ing ready for the best debate since we kept that one bastard from bringing charts because it made Clinton and Bush Sr. look like fools?!?"
    
    Romney: Eat a baby... I know, real distrurbed, right? It's sick I know, but then you'll really know who's loyal and who's just hanging around for the shrimp cocktails/tax breaks

    replyreport
    1. 61

       eternals3ptemberposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Romney: if you aren't up for that, maybe just a puppy
       
       Obama: If you want to up the ante, chug a Four Loko instead

       replyreport
12. 0

    JaxsonRaineposted 11 years ago

    My suggestion to Obama for the last debate... Stop interrupting Romney. Don't attack the 47% remark, he apologized for it, that's class-less. Stop using a study of Romney's tax policy that was walked back by the people who made it. Stop pretending like the Bush tax cuts are some new expenditure coming to the budget that have to be paid for.
    
    My suggestion to Romney... Keep 'rudely' fighting for equal time and equal time blocks. Hammer Obama more on Fast and Furious. Continue to point out Obama's broken promises, especially ones he had control over, ones he never even attempted to fulfill.

    replyreport
    1. 69

       Cody Hodge5posted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Dear Mr. President....
       
       Hammer Romney mercilessly on the 47 percent issue. Don't let him get away with dissing almost half the population. Especially when many of those people are soldiers, the elderly, students and others who may or may not have considered voting for the guy with the R next to his name.
       
       Don't worry about getting extra time. This is a battle, not ballet. The GOP has essentially been pushing America around for the last decade.
       
       Remember, Mitt Romney has no experience with foreign policy. Remember his failed foreign tour this summer? If he bring up Libya, tear him a new one for turning into a political issue before we knew what happened.
       
       One last thing.....you're winning the electoral college HANDILY at this point. Only biased GOP polls are saying otherwise.
       
       Put the nail in the coffin.

       replyreport