Topic: Domestic policy
Air Time: 9:00-10:30 p.m. Eastern Time
Location: University of Denver in Denver, Colorado (Tickets)
Sponsor: Commission on Presidential Debates
Participants: President Barack Obama and Governor Mitt Romney
Moderator: Jim Lehrer (Host of NewsHour on PBS)
The debate will focus on domestic policy and be divided into six time segments of approximately 15 minutes each on topics to be selected by the moderator and announced several weeks before the debate.
The moderator will open each segment with a question, after which each candidate will have two minutes to respond. The moderator will use the balance of the time in the segment for a discussion of the topic.
As Americans await the first debate between the presidential candidates, several comments and questions come to mine. First off, what we will see tonight is not a real ‘debate.’ That leaves the question, well, what is it?
How do we determine who won the debate? It seems to me that the person we like the best will “win.” Who decides who wins and what is the criteria?
Will the winner have zapped the most zingers? Will the winner have the cutest answers? The quickest answers? How will you determine who won?
The debate will be on all major channels.
I thought it was a protest; not a terrorist attack? Did the administration change its mind, again?
I’m with MH on this one. He did a fine job. Lets hope he puts in the same level of performance on the next two debates!
Either way, Goldman Sachs wins!!
@marin, I think 2 different things were going on at the same time in different locations. I am glad that we aren’t calling everything a terrorist attack. Remember under Bush that was a big discussion. I think it desensitizes. Its really hard to make a determination if you can’t do boots on the ground and information is still being gathered.
I think people are just going to bitch regardless of what is done. The same thing happened to Bush.
Remember that plane that went down in Rockaway? Everyone was determined to call it terrorism. It wasn’t.
@Moon-howler
And this is why I a) didn’t watch. B) take consensus with a grain of salt
I think that half the problem is that the press and many others believed what they had put out about Romney and ignored the reality that he IS a good campaigner and a sharp guy.
And the press has pushed the narrative about the superior quality of everything Obama that any deviation from that is a disaster.
I think that Obama’s helpers believed the press reports. And Michael Moore said it best. “This is what happens when you use John Kerry as a debate coach.”
I think and have thought all along that Romney was trying on skin that wasn’t his. He isn’t far right. He is a moderate conservative He deals with situation from logistics rather than from ideology.
He was trying to be all things to all people and it just didn’t feel right.
I still am very uncomfortable with him saying that the president was disgraceful during a crisis. That was a real misstep on his part and he knows better.
Al Gore said the altitude must have gotten to Obama. Toooooo Funny!!!
That was a rather stupid thing for him to say.
i still haven’t figured out what Obama did wrong. Was his fly down? Did he projecticle vomit on anyone? Not that I saw.
I guess he wasn’t perky enough. Jesus the Anerican people are shallow. They go back and forth and bob in the water like corks. He’s good, he’s bad, no that one is good or bad.
It’s probably good that there is an electoral college. The people are really too stupid to select a president…I am beginning to think. they would vote on someone because of their make up, I am convinced.
“I am beginning to think. they would vote on someone because of their make up, I am convinced.”
They did. You must not remember Kennedy vs. Nixon and the whole 5 o’clock shadow, perspiration, etc..
Yes, I remember it although I was way to young to vote in that election. @Clinton. I guess that election was the beginning of the modern election.
@Moon-howler What I found disconcerting was Obama’s unwillingness to look Romney in the eye. He kept his head down, kept writing furiously, and seemed almost detached from the whole thing, while Romney looked at him and addressed him directly. It was surprising to see him so uncomfortable. I don’t think it was as much a question of him being perky as just sort of seeming a little disengaged and a little too reliant on his notes.
I couldn’t tell where their eyes were going. I don’t have any gripes with the performance of either man. I was just glad to see adults out there, after looking at the primary debates.
The word in Massachusettes from people who have directly worked with Romney is he is not the brightest and actually has a smart ass somewhat unpleasent offensive sense of humor.
I guess he would be better liked if he did unseemly things with cigars to his young interns.