Analysis: Obama Wins On Points Romney May Have Done More Damage

Arutz Sheva ^ | 17/10/12 | Dr. Amiel Ungar

[Carry_Okie]

This gives him an opening for all kinds of anti-leftist and anti-corruption points. But no, he didn’t do that at all.

You are only partly correct. Romney wants to carry Michigan and Ohio. He'd have done fine with accusing Zero with robbing Delphi pensions and killing the jobs in dealerships, and then there's the bogus crap about the heavily subsidized Volt still costing over $50,000 and still losing a bundle.

Addressing how their jobs might have been more secure after the bankruptcy process is just too complex for a debate setting. Worse, while it is the economically correct option, advocating bankruptcy might well cost him the election with working class voters in those States.

Is that what you want?

[muawiyah]

I only back Conservative candidates, and if someone claims he's a Republican I want to see his or her credentials.

I am not backing Obamugube or anyone like him.

[9YearLurker]

He was advocating bankruptcy—and then he pivoted to praise Obama for how he handled it, including the bankruptcy. It is the praising of Obama that I objected to.

[hinckley buzzard]

You can win debating "points" if your lie goes unchallenged. When you lie continuously that is not so hard to do. But the "point system" is for pundits to have some way to fill dead air time. Real people go by impressions-- and by jumping up, shouting his lies and interrupting, not to mention the egregious collusion by Crowley the Hutt, Obama left some fairly odoriferous impressions.

[hinckley buzzard]

Watching on CNN, their running psychometric showed Romney doing very well on immigration-- he was as usual more forthright than obama, and the audience noticed.