Showing posts with label debate. Show all posts
Showing posts with label debate. Show all posts

Paul Ryan debate with Joe Biden

Presidential strategies are similar to gestational times, with months of campaigning giving voters time to gradually form their opinions of an applicant.

Against that back drop, Associate Paul Ryan of Wi walked onto likely his greatest stage yet on This and revealed an American voters still getting to know the Republican vice presidential nominee that he is no pushover.

In a controversial 90-minute controversy with Vice Chief executive Joe Biden, He involved in a front attack on a politician nearly three years his older. And he did not cower even when the conversation started with and kept returning to international matters a expected weak point for an economic policy wonk like him and strength for a former chair of the United states chair for economic council Foreign Interaction Panel like his challenger.

For his part, Biden surely invigorated his other Dems, who had reported the other day that Chief executive Obama was too inactive in the face of a in the same way competitive controversy performance by his own competing, Republican presidential nominee Glove Mitt romney.

The vice president castigated Glove romney and Paul Ryan for explaining whole sections of the US voters as freeloaders, mentioning the “47-percent” thoughts made by Glove romney at a private fund-raiser that Obama did not raise the other day.

But Biden, at 69, also verged on losing his cool with the 42-year-old congressman, constantly interrupting him as would a parent exasperated with the commentary of a chatty teen. He even snapped at debate moderator Martha Raddatz of ABC News at one point.

While warming to Democrats, such aggressiveness carried the risk of turning off moderate, independent voters in a race polling nationally within the margin of error. And it played into a well-rehearsed debate thematic delivered by Ryan to the audience at Centre College in Danville, Ky., and watching elsewhere on television or computer screen.

“Barack Obama, four years ago running for president, said if you don’t have any fresh ideas, use stale tactics to scare voters,” Ryan said. “If you don’t have a good record to run on, paint your opponent as someone people should run from.”

The pace was set at the outset, as Biden and Ryan clashed over any responsibility the administration faced for the attack on a US consulate in Benghazi, Libya, last month that killed US Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans.

While the administration first blamed protestors incited by an anti-Muslim video made by US filmmakers, it now says the attack was terrorism plotted to coincide with the anniversary of the 9/11 attack on the US.

“Look, if we’re hit by terrorists we’re going to call it for what it is, a terrorist attack,” Ryan said. “Our ambassador in Paris has a Marine detachment guarding him. Shouldn’t we have a Marine detachment guarding our ambassador in Benghazi, a place where we knew that there was an Al Qaeda cell with arms?”

Broadening his point, Ryan added: “This Benghazi issue would be a tragedy in and of itself, but unfortunately it’s indicative of a broader problem. And that is what we are watching on our TV screens is the unraveling of the Obama foreign policy, which is making the world more chaotic and us less safe.”

Bristling, Biden retorted: “With all due respect, that’s a bunch of malarkey.”

Asked by Raddatz to explain, he added: “No. 1, this lecture on embassy security, the congressman here cut embassy security in his budget by $300 million below what we asked for, No. 1. So much for the embassy security piece. No. 2. Governor Romney, before he knew the facts, before he even knew that our ambassador was killed, he was out making a political statement which was panned by the media around the world. ... I mean, these guys bet against America all the time.”

The vice president went after Ryan and Romney on Medicare cuts included in a budget-cutting plan that heretofore had been responsible for most of the congressman’s national prominence.

“What we did is, we saved $716 billion and put it back, applied it to Medicare,” Biden said in fending off a Ryan criticism of Obamacare. “We cut the cost of Medicare. We stopped overpaying insurance companies, doctors, and hospitals. The AMA supported what we did. AARP endorsed what we did. And it extends the life of Medicare to 2024. They want to wipe this all out.”

In a folksy aside that is part of Biden’s political persona, the vice president added: “Folks, follow your instincts on this one.”

When Ryan again accused the administration of funding its federal universal health care program with a Medicare cut, Biden repeatedly interrupted him. A debate transcript showing whole paragraphs of conversation disintegrated into a stream of one-liners as the two furiously exchanged charges and counter-charges.
READ MORE - Paul Ryan debate with Joe Biden

Presidential Debate of the general election campaign

Presidential Debate of the general election campaign
Was it the natural propensity of old campaigners to take it easy in the starting quarter? Or the propensity of long time enemies to ranking factors off each other rather than light up their differences?

Or was it that the problems on which the presidential strategy will convert are so complex the economic system, taxation, medical care that it’s a task for anyone to make them available for regular listeners?

Whatever the reason, Wed evening's preliminary controversy between Chief executive Obama and his Republican opposition, Glove Mitt romney, offered red various meats for wonks, but perhaps not so much for voters.

So here is a fast deciphering of some of the candidates’ factors. Starting with taxation.

Romney has suggested reducing all minor individual earnings tax prices by one fifth the top rate would come down to 28% from 35% and making up the large income loss by removing problems and tax smashes. He’s promised that the discuss of the individual earnings tax compensated by the rich would not reduce, but that taxation would not improve on the middle-class either.

Obama’s main forced against Glove romney was that the amounts of his tax strategy do not add up. Given the decreasing of tax prices, he said, “it is not possible to come up with enough reductions and problems that only impact high-income people to prevent either increasing the lack or burdening the middle-class. It’s mathematical. It’s mathematics.”

Romney’s riposte: “Virtually everything he just said about my tax strategy is incorrect.”

Obama’s research simply was attracted from work by the Tax Plan Middle, a think container managed by the Brookings organization and the City Institution. The middle honors that any tax strategy that fits Romney’s requirements the cut in prices, maintenance of financial commitment rewards such as low financial commitment profits prices, reduction of the substitute lowest tax and property tax, and “revenue neutrality” (that is, no overall improve or loss of tax revenue) would actually mean greater taxation for all people generating less than $200,000.

Its analysts said they couldn’t fully analyze the proposal because Romney hadn’t explained which loopholes he would eliminate or how. He still hasn’t, and didn’t do so during the debate — beyond repeating a recently unveiled suggestion that every taxpayer might be granted a lump sum maximum in deductions; the figure would diminish for high-income taxpayers.

The candidates predictably sparred over the impact of “Obamacare,” the healthcare reform program enacted in 2010. Romney, who signed an almost identical bill as governor of Massachusetts, continues to insist that it has worked well in that state but can’t be a model on the national level. But he didn’t explain why it shouldn’t work nationwide, except by invoking state’s rights.

Romney repeated his campaign claim that Obamacare cuts $716 billion from Medicare. It’s highly misleading for two reasons. One is that it’s incorrect to suggest it’s a cut in current benefits; in truth, it’s a reduction in future reimbursements to doctors and hospitals, compared with what they would receive under prior law. The other reason is that the budget plan promoted by Romney’s running mate, Rep. Paul D. Ryan, includes the exact same provision — a fact that Obama, unaccountably, failed to point out.

Obama’s obscure reference to a 30% cut proposed by his Republican challenger in Medicaid, a federal-state program mostly serving the indigent and aged, applies to a provision of the Ryan budget plan, endorsed by the Romney campaign, to convert Medicaid to a block grant to states to spend as they wish. The grant would rise along with the growth in the U.S. economy plus one-half of 1%.

But because healthcare costs rise faster than that, congressional budget analysts say the shortfall would reach 34% by the 10th year of the change. The Republican program leaves the task of dealing with that gap to state governors, adding to their budget burdens.

Finally, one remark by Obama undoubtedly raised the hackles of Social Security advocates: his assertion that although Social Security is “structurally sound,” it will need to be “tweaked the way it was by Ronald Reagan and Democratic Speaker Tip O’Neill” in the 1980s. At that time the retirement age was raised modestly and the payroll tax increased significantly. “Tweaks” can cover a lot of things, including changes in inflation adjustments and in retirement ages, that add up to benefit cuts for millions of recipients. To Social Security experts who believe Obama’s commitment to the program may be less than absolute, that wasn’t a comforting moment.
READ MORE - Presidential Debate of the general election campaign

South Carolina Debate For Charged


South Carolina Debate For Charged
Glove Mitt romney usually has been a sleek debater, but in Wednesday evening's circular in Myrtle Seaside, S.C., the former governor of Boston hit some tough times.

Mr. Glove romney resolved haltingly – and indecisively – to the concern of whether he would launch his tax dividends, a issue that has dogged the abundant GOP presidential front-runner for several weeks. When requested about his interval at Bain Investment, Glove romney again meandered through an response on work designed and missing at the personal a guarantee finance company.

When the conversation converted to voting privileges for charged felons who have provided their time, Glove romney gradually declared that he was compared with – but it took him a while to get there. He also took warm for the assault ads a pro-Romney group has been managing.

None of these periods was a game-changer. But they were helpful. In the run-up to Saturday’s main in Southern Carolina, a possibly major fight in the Republican nomination competition, Glove romney could have estimated razor-sharp pondering, in particular, on Bain and on his tax dividends. He did not seem to have imagined through his tendencies in progress.

Just as certainly, Team Government is viewing carefully and getting paperwork. From Wednesday evening's controversy, and at other times in the 15 Republican fighting suits before it, the downside is that Glove romney can get rattled and shook.

The concern of Romney’s tax dividends was perhaps the most inquisitive. The former governor seemed to be considering out noisy when he reacted that he “hadn’t imagined out on publishing tax records” but “if which is been the custom, then I’m not compared with to doing that.”

“Time will tell,” he ongoing. “But I predict that most likely I'm going to get requested to do that around the May interval, and I'll keep that start.”

So which is a yes? You will launch your tax information in April? one of the questioners followed up.

“I – I think I've observed enough from individuals saying, look, you know, let's see your tax information,” Glove romney said. “I have nothing in – in them that – to recommend there's any issue, and I'm delighted to do so. I – I – I kind of experience like we're – we're displaying a lot of visibility at this factor, and if I become our nominee I'm –and what's occurred in historical past is individuals have published them in about May of buy, and that's probably what I'd do.”
READ MORE - South Carolina Debate For Charged

Herman Cain First Debate On The 2012


To get an idea of foreignness of the first debate on the 2012 presidential elections - the first is an informal competition in 2012 in Punjab - consider this: on the Fox News audience to be carried out immediately by Herman Cain, the event is about to escape from nomination of the GOP.

If you wonder who it is, you're not alone: Pizza parrain's former CEO, who barely registers in national polls, has never had a choice. And is regarded as having virtually no chance of winning the GOP nomination.

But the vast majority of people who sit with Republican pollster Frank Luntz says that Cain won the debate with his frankness and a normal delivery. (And this despite the fact that when asked about what he would do in Afghanistan, said it would consider "the experts and their advice and comments." The Fox News debate moderators seemed incredulous that has not offered a position .) Luntz seemed overwhelmed by the response of Cain, who threw as unprecedented. "Something very special has happened tonight," he said.

Maybe. But the debate was considered a non-event on the device as chairman of the House John Boehner has spent the night to miss it, opting instead for a drink at a Washington steakhouse. "I'll read about it tomorrow," Hotsheet.

No more name-potential candidates - Mitt Romney, Mike Huckabee, Sarah Palin, Newt Gingrich, even Donald Trump - an event meant he generated little attention despite its status as the first debate of the cycle. Among the five men onstage - Cain, former Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty, Texas Ron Paul, former New Mexico governor Gary Johnson and former Senator Rick Santorum in Pennsylvania - only Pawlenty is considered by Washington insiders as having a legitimate chance at the nomination of the GOP.

Pawlenty was to look presidential - despite the company's relatively unheralded - and pulled out a lot. The most difficult moment was when the former governor was asked to defend their past support for the energy cap-and-trade, which has received a few words Boos. Pawlenty to be explained, in part, saying, literally, "No is perfect. "

In its response may be the most interesting of the night, refused to take a lot less likely than his rival Mitt Romney on the right of health care Romney of Massachusetts.

"Governor Romney is not here to defend himself, so I have no intention of choosing him or in a position where he took the Massachusetts" Pawlenty said. Intraparty sparring exhibition, will have to wait.

Pawlenty found a way to go, when President Obama's foreign policy - despite the rise Obama has received about the killing of Osama bin Laden. He said that although the president "has done a good job and I tip my hat to him at that moment," raid on bin Laden does not "sum" of Obama's foreign policy record. In other sectors, Pawlenty has asked the president is "weak."

"The questions that come up when he was president, he got the wrong strategy, every time," said Pawlenty. At one point, he referred to the United Nations as "pathetic."

Santorum, who was on a much more combative of the night, Obama complained that "faced with the mullahs" in Iran during the protests.

"If you look at what Obama has done well in foreign policy has always been a continuation of Bush policy," said Santorum, who said that Obama has "done wrong" whenever others.

90-minute debate was held at Peace Center in Greenville, South Carolina, a key early voting state. Candidates not invited to participate with the other, limiting the fireworks.

The first applause of the evening came for Paul, who said the killing of bin Laden was a good opportunity to end the war in Afghanistan. Johnson, a fellow Libertarian, echoed that sentiment, saying the troops should come home "tomorrow."

Asked if they would support waterboarding terror suspects under certain circumstances - an issue rekindled by the killing of bin Laden, Paul, Pawlenty and Santorum raised their hands. Paul and Johnson did not. Both Paul and Johnson also discussed their support for barring the federal government from making drugs illegal. (Moderators pressed Paul on heroin specifically.) Paul drew another distinction with most of the men onstage when he said all foreign aid to the Middle East should be cut and that America should not be running secret CIA prisons.

Johnson, who supports abortion rights, became frustrated with debate moderators at one point, complaining he was not being asked enough questions. He also received the most frivolous question of the night, asked what his reality show would be about if he were offered one.

Santorum was pressed all night on being an extremist - he denied being "anti-Islam" or too socially conservative to win a general election - and pointed to his past electoral successes to cast himself as electable when debate moderators asked if Mr. Obama is unbeatable. (Unsurprisingly, he left out the 18 percentage point drubbing he took in losing his Senate seat in 2006.)

The also-ran nature of the debate was reflected in the fact that moderators asked a cluster of questions focused on the potential candidates who were not present. Paul was asked if Rep. Michele Bachmann had taken his mantle of Tea Party leader; Pawlenty was asked his thoughts on Huckabee. ("I love the Huck," he replied, awkwardly.)

The economy is the most important issue for a plurality of Americans, and the candidates certainly seized on it. Pawlenty, for one, called the National Labor Relations Board's bid to keep Boeing from building Dreamliner 787s at a nonunion plant in South Carolina "preposterous."

It was a good issue for Pawlenty (and Cain, too, who also cited it), because it allowed them to rail against big government, cast themselves as job creators, and spotlight an issue important to South Carolina voters. That's an opportunity they weren't going to pass up. (Indeed, Pawlenty focused on the same issue in a CBS News interview before the debate.)

Polls show a wide-open Republican race led by Romney, Huckabee and Trump, and Thursday night's likely-little-watched festivities were unlikely to move the numbers all that much. For the unknown candidates it was a chance to make a splash - and from that perspective, Cain certainly seems to have acquitted himself nicely. But with most eyes focused elsewhere, Thursday night is likely to be remembered -- if it's remembered at all -- as a footnote in the march to the nomination.
READ MORE - Herman Cain First Debate On The 2012