Official Debate Thread II (Romney v. Obama)

Originally Posted by morf13

What drives gas prices?????? SUPPLY & DEMAND, !! If you need it and want it, we can sell it for more. If we have a product that is NOT needed or demand, then we drop the price. Thats a basic philosophy that has been the rule forever.

It was mentioned that gas prices were so much lower before Obama got into office because there was a great recession across the world, and demand was down so they dropped the price. HELLO???? Are we not in a world recession now? Shouldn't the gas prices be going down again?
Click to expand...

Duh. Prices are going up because the economy is recovering. And they weren't all that low during the bush administration anyhow.

The hypocrisy of the Conservatives never fails to amaze me and the hypocrisy of blaming President Obama for rising gas prices is no exception!

Gas price under bush went to $4.21 a gallon and was over $3.00 a gallon most of his last term in office.

The only reason gas was at $1.85 when President Obama took office is because of the economic crash which greatly reduced demand and the crash effected all countries not just the US.

Gas prices rise with demand and as the economy has improved it is completely normal for gas prices to increase as more businesses use fuel for deliveries, more trucks on the road, more people traveling, and more people driving to work.

So our rising gas price is actually an indicator that the economy is recovering.

mmm-71352565023.jpeg


http://www.sodahead.com/united-stat...-blame-for-gas-prices-today/question-2508615/
 
PostmodernProphet said:
the question was who made the decision to deny expanded security......and no, he did not answer it......if your talking about "act of terror" the moderator did side with him initially, then admitted her error later......he never called it an act of terror......instead, he condemned attacks on religious beliefs that incite senseless violence.....
Click to expand...
He answered the question. Romney got beat down because he has politicized a national security issue in which all the information is not in yet. It was stupid and irresponsible thing to do and he got his ass nailed for it and rightly so.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
???...and yet, Obama couldn't answer the question that was asked......and he made the blunder of pretending he'd called the incident an "act of terror"......I would think you'd be running from that one......
Click to expand...


Obama didn't answer the question asked, but Romney failed to capitalize by simply pointing that out. Candy Crowley tried to press Obama on the point and Obama gave a great response:

MS. CROWLEY: Because we’re closing in, I want to still get a lot of people in. I want to ask you something, Mr. President, and then have the governor just quickly. Your secretary of state, as I’m sure you know, has said that she takes full responsibility for the attack on the diplomatic mission in Benghazi.

Does the buck stop with your secretary of state as far as what went on here?

PRESIDENT OBAMA: Secretary Clinton has done an extraordinary job. But she works for me. I’m the president. And I’m always responsible. And that’s why nobody is more interested in finding out exactly what happened than I did (sic).

The day after the attack, Governor, I stood in the Rose Garden, and I told the American people and the world that we are going to find out exactly what happened, that this was an act of terror. And I also said that we’re going to hunt down those who committed this crime. And then a few days later, I was there greeting the caskets coming into Andrews Air Force Base and grieving with the families.

And the suggestion that anybody in my team, whether the secretary of state, our U.N. ambassador, anybody on my team would play politics or mislead when we’ve lost four of our own, Governor, is offensive. That’s not what we do. That’s not what I do as president. That’s not what I do as commander in chief.
Click to expand...


Then Romney stepped in it big time on the "act of terror" thing so badly that Candy Crowley called him out on it and Obama made him look like as ass in general. Romeny should have been strong on this but be fumbled big time.
 
christiefan915 said:
Hilarious. When the Dems kick ass, blame it on the moderator. Yet the absolute worst moderator of the three was Lehrer, who lost all control from the start.
Click to expand...

Sorry, didnt realize that Obama "kicked ass" thought it was pretty close. I gave the win to Obama,but not by much. I think the CNN opinion polls back me up. No landslide one-sided victory like Romney had in the first debate. And I am not blaming anything on Crowley, I simply said that it is NOT her job to become one of the debaters. She should encourage the two debaters to stick to their time limits, not attack each other, and stuff like that. She should NOT be a fact checker, and become an assistant to EITHER of the candidates, and here's why:

Fact- Obama was WRONG when he denied that there was less federal land open for oil production and exploration. Romney was RIGHT. Yet Crowley did not see fit to correct Obama. So she either has to correct BOTH men or none at all.
 
morf13 said:
I really think Candy Crowley should NOT have injected herself into the debate, and added to the conversation. Last I checked, it is NOT her job to be part of the debate, there were only 2 people in the debate last night. She didn't need to, and should not have, come to Obama's defense. He can take care of himself, and the fact checkers are the ones who sort out what is true and what is not true coming out of the candidate's mouths. And best of all, a big hoopla is being made by team Obama that the Lybia portion was a victory for him.

:youdontsay:

The missed point is, that for days, and WEEKS after the attack, team Obama was still saying this was a youtube video protest. He said it to the U.N., and mentioned it several times. He's going to get the hard questions about Libya in the next debate, and he will have to come clean. What did he know, when did he know it, who told him what, why was his team still calling it a youtube video protest? These are all valid questions. People also want to know who specifically informed them that it was a youtube video protest, why was security not beefed up? Yes, no Candy Crowley there next time, and no real debate. He will be asked some questions, and will have to sit back and answer.
Click to expand...

How funny you are. You and the other rabid righties didn't say a word about Romney politicizing the attack before he had a clue. The act of a desperate man.

Despite the fact that U.S. missions in Egypt and Libya came under attack after that embassy statement, with crowds besieging the Cairo embassy and the consulate in Benghazi in the late hours of September 11, the campaign released a statement from Romney saying, "It's disgraceful that the Obama Administration's first response was not to condemn attacks on our diplomatic missions, but to sympathize with those who waged the attacks."
 
morf13 said:
Sorry, didnt realize that Obama "kicked ass" thought it was pretty close. I gave the win to Obama,but not by much. I think the CNN opinion polls back me up. No landslide one-sided victory like Romney had in the first debate. And I am not blaming anything on Crowley, I simply said that it is NOT her job to become one of the debaters. She should encourage the two debaters to stick to their time limits, not attack each other, and stuff like that. She should NOT be a fact checker, and become an assistant to EITHER of the candidates, and here's why:

Fact- Obama was WRONG when he denied that there was less federal land open for oil production and exploration. Romney was RIGHT. Yet Crowley did not see fit to correct Obama. So she either has to correct BOTH men or none at all.
Click to expand...

Mitt Romney and President Obama jousted over their energy policies during the second presidential debate.
By Neela Banerjee October 16, 2012, 7:22 p.m.

Mitt Romney said "the president cut in half the number of licenses and permits for drilling on federal lands and in federal waters."

According to the Bureau of Land Management, in fiscal year 2011, 2,188 leases were issued for energy development on federal lands. Four years earlier, in fiscal year 2007, 3499 leases were issued. So, not quite a 50% drop, but a drop nonetheless.

However, the biggest drop-off came in fiscal year 2008, to 2,416 leases. The fiscal year for the federal government starts Oct. 1, 2007, so that decline began under the Bush administration. Leases under President Obama took a precipitous drop in 2010, because of the moratorium the administration implemented in the wake of the Gulf of Mexico oil spill, which occurred on federal land and was the worst offshore oil spill in federal history. The number of permits has started climbing since then.

Politifact.com noted the following about drilling on federal lands: "From 2004-08, well into Bush’s tenure, oil production on federal lands and waters fell in four of five years, for a net decrease of 16.8%. From 2009-11, the Obama years, oil production rose two of three years, for a net increase of 10.6%."


www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-fact-check-presidential-debate-drilling-20121016,0,5755460.story
 
christiefan915 said:
Duh. Prices are going up because the economy is recovering. And they weren't all that low during the bush administration anyhow.

The hypocrisy of the Conservatives never fails to amaze me and the hypocrisy of blaming President Obama for rising gas prices is no exception!

Gas price under bush went to $4.21 a gallon and was over $3.00 a gallon most of his last term in office.

The only reason gas was at $1.85 when President Obama took office is because of the economic crash which greatly reduced demand and the crash effected all countries not just the US.

Gas prices rise with demand and as the economy has improved it is completely normal for gas prices to increase as more businesses use fuel for deliveries, more trucks on the road, more people traveling, and more people driving to work.

So our rising gas price is actually an indicator that the economy is recovering.

mmm-71352565023.jpeg


http://www.sodahead.com/united-stat...-blame-for-gas-prices-today/question-2508615/
Click to expand...

Are you kidding? The world economy is 'recovering'? Are you saying that overall, the world economy is NOT still in recession? And if it has truly been 'recovering', why have we not seen a gradual increasein gas prices? It has been high for a long time. What was the lowest price of gas during Obama's time in office????

Here's a 36 month trend from GasBuddy-
http://gasbuddy.com/gb_retail_price_chart.aspx

You can see, its been up for quite a while.

Now let's go back 8 years-
http://gasbuddy.com/gb_retail_price_chart.aspx

Gas has steadily climbed under Obama every month since he took over to where it is now.

Lastly, is it your contention that if we produced our own oil here in the USA, that prices would be the same as what they are now?? I hope not, because you wouldn't be honest if that is your contention. The problem is, we will never get to be energy independent with rules & restrictions of Obama's in place, along with his failure to act to get us energy independent.

I am not living in a dreamworld, I dont ever expect to see $1 a gallon gas again. BUT, if we can bring gas down by 25 or 30%, that's a huge impact on our economy and our wallets
 
christiefan915 said:
Duh. Prices are going up because the economy is recovering. And they weren't all that low during the bush administration anyhow.

The hypocrisy of the Conservatives never fails to amaze me and the hypocrisy of blaming President Obama for rising gas prices is no exception!

Gas price under bush went to $4.21 a gallon and was over $3.00 a gallon most of his last term in office.
Click to expand...


Incorrect. The national average for gasoline only went over $3 towards the end of his second term.

http://gasbuddy.com/gb_retail_price_chart.aspx

That said, the run up is largely due to the increase in global demand as you said. It is just funny listening to the two parties switch positions on this issue. NOW the Dems believe the President has little control and the Reps think it is Obama's fault.

While the politicians can create policies that alter the long term price moves, they can do little in the short term (2 years or less).

The one knock on Obama is his hammering production on Federal Leases by almost 11% last year. That does not help matters. Further expansion of our own production coupled with expansions of nat gas production will help dramatically decrease the price of fuel long term on a relative basis. Not to mention improve our national security and economy.

As I have stated before, it is time to shift our transportation over to nat gas. The technology is here, the nat gas is here, we just need to get production up and the distribution network established. That will take about 3-5 years, but it would improve our economic outlook and reduce our dependency on foreign energy.

The only reason gas was at $1.85 when President Obama took office is because of the economic crash which greatly reduced demand and the crash effected all countries not just the US.
Click to expand...

Correct. It was an over reaction to the financial crisis. funny how no one bitches about speculators taking it too far in that direction... :)


Gas prices rise with demand and as the economy has improved it is completely normal for gas prices to increase as more businesses use fuel for deliveries, more trucks on the road, more people traveling, and more people driving to work.

So our rising gas price is actually an indicator that the economy is recovering.
Click to expand...

It may indicate a rise in the global economy, but not necessarily our economy. The other side is that we have seen a reduction in production on Federal land, that is a result of policy. A reduction in supply can drive prices up just as an increase in demand can. Part of the reason the prices have gone up is tied to the refinery capacity in the US being a bit sporadic of late (just ask CA). That too is out of the hands of the President.
 
morf13 said:
Are you kidding? The world economy is 'recovering'? Are you saying that overall, the world economy is NOT still in recession? And if it has truly been 'recovering', why have we not seen a gradual increasein gas prices? It has been high for a long time. What was the lowest price of gas during Obama's time in office????

Here's a 36 month trend from GasBuddy-
http://gasbuddy.com/gb_retail_price_chart.aspx

You can see, its been up for quite a while.

Now let's go back 8 years-
http://gasbuddy.com/gb_retail_price_chart.aspx

Gas has steadily climbed under Obama every month since he took over to where it is now.

Lastly, is it your contention that if we produced our own oil here in the USA, that prices would be the same as what they are now?? I hope not, because you wouldn't be honest if that is your contention. The problem is, we will never get to be energy independent with rules & restrictions of Obama's in place, along with his failure to act to get us energy independent.

I am not living in a dreamworld, I dont ever expect to see $1 a gallon gas again. BUT, if we can bring gas down by 25 or 30%, that's a huge impact on our economy and our wallets
Click to expand...

Long story short, yes I think the global economy is improving but very slowly. And there was a gradual increase in prices until the spike a year ago. Also, I don't believe we can produce enough oil in the US to meet our needs but am open to hearing other viewpoints. Furthermore, pols in this country have been arguing about energy independence for decades so you can hardly lay blame on Obama only.
 
General Buck Turgidson said:
Obama didn't answer the question asked, but Romney failed to capitalize by simply pointing that out. Candy Crowley tried to press Obama on the point and Obama gave a great response:




Then Romney stepped in it big time on the "act of terror" thing so badly that Candy Crowley called him out on it and Obama made him look like as ass in general. Romeny should have been strong on this but be fumbled big time.
Click to expand...
Mitt knew it too. You sould literally see the blood drain from his face when Obama hammared him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top