Attacking Obama, or attacking his policies?Erica wrote:Everywhere i go, i am hearing about the election this year. Lots of hateful ads, attacking each others and stuffs. its just nasty. However, i watched the debate last night and i would say Romney was slightly better than Obama in terms of speaking. Romney has been screwing up for during the whole campaign and he got his **** together last night. But he was just attacking Obama but Obama didn't fight back. I am just so amazed Pres. Obama didn't mention the "47 percent" "Bain", or Romneys offshore accounts in Cayman Islands, and why Romney is not releasing his tax returns. Maybe that was Obama's strategy. Not to attack and keep things smart and simple.
Romney released his tax returns. If Romney's offshore accounts were illegal, he'd be in jail.
Your 47% reference has already been explained by Romney, and that particular recording of Romney's reference has already been exposed for being edited. It's missing about 2 minutes, and David Corn admitted it. Had Obama brought it up again, Romney would just have given the same explanation again.
You will continue to be amazed. Obama is not on the campaign trail speaking to a crowd and without cameras most of the time. He is on national television in a debate where his claims will be challenged. He's not used to that, which is why he had little or no response. And the moderator isn't there to rescue Obama. If Obama is caught embellishing in a debate, it is much different than going unchallenged on the campaign trail and just whipping a crowd into a frenzy.
The difference between Obama in 2008 and Obama in 2012 is that Obama had no record in 2008. He could say anything and promise anything and never give a single detail about how he would do it. In 2012, Obama has a record that is difficult to defend.