10.16.2012 09:55 PM

Debate take, in tweets







  1. Philippe says:

    One question: if Romney did such a great job for Massachusetts as he CONSTANTLY reminds us, why the hell are the State’s people turned against him? He’s trailing by a whopping margin and won’t hold the State. Obama needs to hammer his failures as Governor home and expose him. Romney would have us believe he did a great job – more good’ol Republican bullshit.

  2. nic coivert says:

    O BAM A

  3. Sean says:

    Obama definitely won. Romney’s big mistake was trying to repeat with the same strategy. He got way too aggressive with the moderator. That worked well in the first debate because he seemed in charge. Largely b/c the moderator let him get away with too much. Hats off to Crowley, she wouldn’t take any of it from either side. Didn’t know she had it in her. Frankly, Crowley buried Romney tonight, but he deserved it. Obama was on his “A” game. He seemed calm, cool, aggressive in short moments when he needed to be. Loved the moment when Romney tried to deflect the Bush legacy… Obama laughing / talking… “I don’t think so Candy” Romney seemed embarrassed, afraid, defeated. He knew this was his last chance and he blew it. Can’t wait ’till E-Day. I’m crossing the border just to be at a Dem. Victory Party.

  4. Frmr disgruntled Con now Happy Lib... says:

    Perhaps Obama’s first debate was a rope-a-dope(no pun intended) and in this second debate, the true Obama came to the fore?….
    At any rate, its good news that Obama won this one….


  5. nic coivert says:

    Epstein is the 1 percent, the one percent Mitt looks to help.

  6. WDM says:

    My own amateur analysis: Probably a draw for the first hour with a slight edge to Obama, however, the edge widens when compared to the last debate, which matters. People were reminded of why Obama was such an attractive candidate last time around. Thought the last half hour was all Obama, Romney struggled through most of the questions in the last part of the debate which made the overall debate a clear win for Obama, and again, given the last debate it made the win even bigger.

  7. Ronald O'Dowd says:


    I agree. Tea Party be damned. My sense of it is that those who have already been beaten down seem to be willing to give their President another shot. They see him out there fighting for them. They also seem to see light ahead in the tunnel. If I had to call it now, I would say Obama wins but I expect it to be close. What people say they will do in a secret ballot is not necessarily what they actually do with their pencil.

  8. Greg from Calgary says:

    Well, glad to see Obama didn’t get hammered like in the first debate.

  9. dave says:

    I understand that both candidate’s camps ahd to sign an agreement that they take part on only the debates put on by the official debate control group, that seems to be a branch of the Repubs and Demos.
    Next week are debates including Stein(Green), Anderson (Justice), a candidate for the Libertarians, and, possibly a 4th candidate for prez. Obama and Romney will not be inon those debates because they signed the agreement to take part only in the offical debates.
    I notice Stein and her running mate were arrested when they tried to join the audience for last evening’s debate.

    I dunno…we sure lose a lot when we exclude so many ideas and approaches to our collective problems and plans.

  10. J.W. (WB) says:

    In both debates, Romney has acted the patrician, the aristocrat, the English nobleman who looks with disdain and contempt at the peasants below, in this case both of the moderators, and even Obama the POTUS.
    He acted like he thought they should just move out of his way and not impede him. He assumed he had the right to run roughshod over the instructions of the moderators and order them out of his way as you would an obedient servant. He’s been surrounded by nothing but sycophants his whole life and it showed.
    This could be a very dangerous President.

  11. Ronald O'Dowd says:

    J.W. (WB),

    No doubt that Romney does have a patrician streak. However, even disasters make adequate presidents. Ford, Carter, the Bushes. Brilliant presidents rarely live up to expectations. Muddling through is an American truism. Some of the most unprepared turned out to be very good to excellent presidents — Truman, Reagan and Clinton so you never can tell. In the final analysis, the United States is great at surviving its presidents and I doubt Romney would be an exception to the rule.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *