topic
One Good Thing the OTHER Side Said

Introduced: October 15 2012

Maybe bi-partisanship can begin with us. Listen carefully to the debate on October 16 and tell us One Thing you can agree with, even tho' the opposing candidate said it.

Dialogue on One Good Thing the OTHER Side Said
IWD:

Note from IWD: Last week’s question for IWD members was a tough assignment. "Find ONE thing the candidate who’s not your favorite says that you can agree with."

One IWD member wrote in immediately, sticking to the "Political Pilates...flex-and-strengthen" metaphor, and said “You might be asking me to stretch more than I’m capable of doing.” We have some interesting replies; you did find some points that resonated with you, no matter out of whose mouth they came. But you also expressed feelings from disappointment to disgust about the debate itself. What do we get from the debates? We don’t get a clear view of the candidates’ positions on issues; we get a close-up look at posturing. We see how their handlers have prepared them to deliver canned lines and to evade direct questions. We saw finger-pointing and derisive name-calling. Maybe debates have outlived their usefulness, but we’re stuck with them for this election, because no one has come up with a better format in time for us to vote this year.

 

406:

Even though I was disgusted with both debaters and eventually had to turn off the TV because NO QUESTIONS WERE BEING ANSWERED BY EITHER CANDIDATE, I do agree with Mitt Romney on some tax issues. 1) I strongly believe that the tax code should be simplified 2) I believe that we should have lower tax rates on interest and dividends, and capital gains, than on earned income, because I think it is fair and because I think we need to encourage people to save; and 3) I believe that all Americans who earn wages should pay federal income taxes, even if it is a very small amount for low earners (not sure if Romney has articulated this in this way), because paying for services acknowledges and assigns value, and perhaps keeps the entire working population invested in its government.

093:

I was impressed with the fact that Governor Romney was faced with a state legislature in Massachusetts that was 87% Democrats. He pointed that out to suggest that he could increase bi-partisanship in Congress. While I’m rather skeptical about that – I think our current Congress is divided beyond what most legislative bodies have ever been – I’ll admit there’s a possibility he might have learned something that would apply.

536:

I have to give President Obama credit for passage of the Lilly Ledbetter Act, which he brought up in the debate when asked about equal pay for women.

Note from IWD: The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act was the first bill signed into law under the Obama Administration. The law allows more opportunity for women who feel they have been discriminated against by their employer in terms of wages to take legal action against that employer. It involves the statue of limitations for bringing law suits. A 2007 decision by the Supreme Court, ruling on law that existed at that time, said that the statue of limitations for presenting an equal pay lawsuit begins on the date the employer makes the wage decision deemed to be discriminatory. The 2009 Act changes the law so that the statue of limitations clock resets at the date of the most recent paycheck. Although a spokesman for Governor Romney initially said he was opposed to the bill back in 2009, he later retracted that statement and said the Governor never weighed in on the 2009 law.

243:

I agree with President Obama that we need to close tax loopholes for companies that send jobs overseas.

171:

Although I have become convinced over the past months that President Obama leans much further left than I do – and that his agenda for big government is not something I approve of, so I won’t be voting for him – I can’t argue with him when he says that the role of government is to keep people safe and create ladders of opportunity. However, it’s how those concepts are executed that matters.

222:

I have recently seen the documentary Inside Job – which I think everyone should see because it explains the role played by the incestuous relationship between Wall Street Banks, politicians, and even academia in creating the environment that took our economy down in 2008. Romney said in the debate that the Dodd-Frank bill had unintended consequences of designating some banks as too big to fail. I would like to know more about that and hear more about what Romney would do differently.

Note from IWD: The actual name of the act is "Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act." It became law on July 21, 2010, and was a response to the economic meltdown that occurred in the years preceding. Its focus was on financial regulation and curtailing some practices of large financial institutions. Another summary: http://searchfinancialsecurity.techtarget.com/definition/Dodd-Frank-Act

Here's the link to a preview of Inside Job: http://www.sonyclassics.com/insidejob/

 

031:

I would like to reply as requested, but I can't. I am an undecided voter, but despite my attention to the debate, I didn't hear specific action plans from either candidate. The editorial in my local newspaper expresses my opinion: "It would be a welcome change if both presidential candidates engaged in open and honest discussion about what, exactly, they intend to do to redirect the federal spending trajectory". Sadly, I don't think this will happen before Nov 6th. Maybe I should flip a coin on election day...

148:

Since I am undecided at this point, I felt that I could pick the best things I heard from both sides and compare what I liked better.

Improve education: they both agreed it is a number one priority.

Taxes: Romney did a better job presenting his views, Obama was not as clear as he should have been about Federal debt. They both agreed that Simpson Boles with a balanced approach was the right way to proceed. Obama was singled out for not following thru with the Simpson Boles concept.

Entitlements: Both agreed that existing seniors would not be affected, but something had to be done to reduce the cost of Social Security and Medicare. Obama missed a chance to show that Romney is backtracking

Health Care: Obama did better defending his position and Romney backed off since his plan in Mass is so similar.

Role of Government: Romney did much better by always referring to the Constitution. Obama didn’t catch on

IWD:

Note from IWD: Last week’s question for IWD members was a tough assignment. "Find ONE thing the candidate who’s not your favorite says that you can agree with."

One IWD member wrote in immediately, sticking to the "Political Pilates...flex-and-strengthen" metaphor, and said “You might be asking me to stretch more than I’m capable of doing.” We have some interesting replies; you did find some points that resonated with you, no matter out of whose mouth they came. But you also expressed feelings from disappointment to disgust about the debate itself. What do we get from the debates? We don’t get a clear view of the candidates’ positions on issues; we get a close-up look at posturing. We see how their handlers have prepared them to deliver canned lines and to evade direct questions. We saw finger-pointing and derisive name-calling. Maybe debates have outlived their usefulness, but we’re stuck with them for this election, because no one has come up with a better format in time for us to vote this year.

 

406:

Even though I was disgusted with both debaters and eventually had to turn off the TV because NO QUESTIONS WERE BEING ANSWERED BY EITHER CANDIDATE, I do agree with Mitt Romney on some tax issues. 1) I strongly believe that the tax code should be simplified 2) I believe that we should have lower tax rates on interest and dividends, and capital gains, than on earned income, because I think it is fair and because I think we need to encourage people to save; and 3) I believe that all Americans who earn wages should pay federal income taxes, even if it is a very small amount for low earners (not sure if Romney has articulated this in this way), because paying for services acknowledges and assigns value, and perhaps keeps the entire working population invested in its government.

093:

I was impressed with the fact that Governor Romney was faced with a state legislature in Massachusetts that was 87% Democrats. He pointed that out to suggest that he could increase bi-partisanship in Congress. While I’m rather skeptical about that – I think our current Congress is divided beyond what most legislative bodies have ever been – I’ll admit there’s a possibility he might have learned something that would apply.

536:

I have to give President Obama credit for passage of the Lilly Ledbetter Act, which he brought up in the debate when asked about equal pay for women.

Note from IWD: The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act was the first bill signed into law under the Obama Administration. The law allows more opportunity for women who feel they have been discriminated against by their employer in terms of wages to take legal action against that employer. It involves the statue of limitations for bringing law suits. A 2007 decision by the Supreme Court, ruling on law that existed at that time, said that the statue of limitations for presenting an equal pay lawsuit begins on the date the employer makes the wage decision deemed to be discriminatory. The 2009 Act changes the law so that the statue of limitations clock resets at the date of the most recent paycheck. Although a spokesman for Governor Romney initially said he was opposed to the bill back in 2009, he later retracted that statement and said the Governor never weighed in on the 2009 law.

243:

I agree with President Obama that we need to close tax loopholes for companies that send jobs overseas.

171:

Although I have become convinced over the past months that President Obama leans much further left than I do – and that his agenda for big government is not something I approve of, so I won’t be voting for him – I can’t argue with him when he says that the role of government is to keep people safe and create ladders of opportunity. However, it’s how those concepts are executed that matters.

222:

I have recently seen the documentary Inside Job – which I think everyone should see because it explains the role played by the incestuous relationship between Wall Street Banks, politicians, and even academia in creating the environment that took our economy down in 2008. Romney said in the debate that the Dodd-Frank bill had unintended consequences of designating some banks as too big to fail. I would like to know more about that and hear more about what Romney would do differently.

Note from IWD: The actual name of the act is "Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act." It became law on July 21, 2010, and was a response to the economic meltdown that occurred in the years preceding. Its focus was on financial regulation and curtailing some practices of large financial institutions. Another summary: http://searchfinancialsecurity.techtarget.com/definition/Dodd-Frank-Act

Here's the link to a preview of Inside Job: http://www.sonyclassics.com/insidejob/

 

031:

I would like to reply as requested, but I can't. I am an undecided voter, but despite my attention to the debate, I didn't hear specific action plans from either candidate. The editorial in my local newspaper expresses my opinion: "It would be a welcome change if both presidential candidates engaged in open and honest discussion about what, exactly, they intend to do to redirect the federal spending trajectory". Sadly, I don't think this will happen before Nov 6th. Maybe I should flip a coin on election day...

148:

Since I am undecided at this point, I felt that I could pick the best things I heard from both sides and compare what I liked better.

Improve education: they both agreed it is a number one priority.

Taxes: Romney did a better job presenting his views, Obama was not as clear as he should have been about Federal debt. They both agreed that Simpson Boles with a balanced approach was the right way to proceed. Obama was singled out for not following thru with the Simpson Boles concept.

Entitlements: Both agreed that existing seniors would not be affected, but something had to be done to reduce the cost of Social Security and Medicare. Obama missed a chance to show that Romney is backtracking

Health Care: Obama did better defending his position and Romney backed off since his plan in Mass is so similar.

Role of Government: Romney did much better by always referring to the Constitution. Obama didn’t catch on

148:

Since I am undecided at this point, I felt that I could pick the best things I heard from both sides and compare what I liked better.

Improve education: they both agreed it is a number one priority.

Taxes: Romney did a better job presenting his views, Obama was not as clear as he should have been about Federal debt. They both agreed that Simpson Boles with a balanced approach was the right way to proceed. Obama was singled out for not following thru with the Simpson Boles concept.

Entitlements: Both agreed that existing seniors would not be affected, but something had to be done to reduce the cost of Social Security and Medicare. Obama missed a chance to show that Romney is backtracking

Health Care: Obama did better defending his position and Romney backed off since his plan in Mass is so similar.

Role of Government: Romney did much better by always referring to the Constitution. Obama didn’t catch on

031:

I would like to reply as requested, but I can't. I am an undecided voter, but despite my attention to the debate, I didn't hear specific action plans from either candidate. The editorial in my local newspaper expresses my opinion: "It would be a welcome change if both presidential candidates engaged in open and honest discussion about what, exactly, they intend to do to redirect the federal spending trajectory". Sadly, I don't think this will happen before Nov 6th. Maybe I should flip a coin on election day...

222:

I have recently seen the documentary Inside Job – which I think everyone should see because it explains the role played by the incestuous relationship between Wall Street Banks, politicians, and even academia in creating the environment that took our economy down in 2008. Romney said in the debate that the Dodd-Frank bill had unintended consequences of designating some banks as too big to fail. I would like to know more about that and hear more about what Romney would do differently.

Note from IWD: The actual name of the act is "Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act." It became law on July 21, 2010, and was a response to the economic meltdown that occurred in the years preceding. Its focus was on financial regulation and curtailing some practices of large financial institutions. Another summary: http://searchfinancialsecurity.techtarget.com/definition/Dodd-Frank-Act

Here's the link to a preview of Inside Job: http://www.sonyclassics.com/insidejob/

 

171:

Although I have become convinced over the past months that President Obama leans much further left than I do – and that his agenda for big government is not something I approve of, so I won’t be voting for him – I can’t argue with him when he says that the role of government is to keep people safe and create ladders of opportunity. However, it’s how those concepts are executed that matters.

243:

I agree with President Obama that we need to close tax loopholes for companies that send jobs overseas.

536:

I have to give President Obama credit for passage of the Lilly Ledbetter Act, which he brought up in the debate when asked about equal pay for women.

Note from IWD: The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act was the first bill signed into law under the Obama Administration. The law allows more opportunity for women who feel they have been discriminated against by their employer in terms of wages to take legal action against that employer. It involves the statue of limitations for bringing law suits. A 2007 decision by the Supreme Court, ruling on law that existed at that time, said that the statue of limitations for presenting an equal pay lawsuit begins on the date the employer makes the wage decision deemed to be discriminatory. The 2009 Act changes the law so that the statue of limitations clock resets at the date of the most recent paycheck. Although a spokesman for Governor Romney initially said he was opposed to the bill back in 2009, he later retracted that statement and said the Governor never weighed in on the 2009 law.

093:

I was impressed with the fact that Governor Romney was faced with a state legislature in Massachusetts that was 87% Democrats. He pointed that out to suggest that he could increase bi-partisanship in Congress. While I’m rather skeptical about that – I think our current Congress is divided beyond what most legislative bodies have ever been – I’ll admit there’s a possibility he might have learned something that would apply.

406:

Even though I was disgusted with both debaters and eventually had to turn off the TV because NO QUESTIONS WERE BEING ANSWERED BY EITHER CANDIDATE, I do agree with Mitt Romney on some tax issues. 1) I strongly believe that the tax code should be simplified 2) I believe that we should have lower tax rates on interest and dividends, and capital gains, than on earned income, because I think it is fair and because I think we need to encourage people to save; and 3) I believe that all Americans who earn wages should pay federal income taxes, even if it is a very small amount for low earners (not sure if Romney has articulated this in this way), because paying for services acknowledges and assigns value, and perhaps keeps the entire working population invested in its government.

IWD:

Note from IWD: Last week’s question for IWD members was a tough assignment. "Find ONE thing the candidate who’s not your favorite says that you can agree with."

One IWD member wrote in immediately, sticking to the "Political Pilates...flex-and-strengthen" metaphor, and said “You might be asking me to stretch more than I’m capable of doing.” We have some interesting replies; you did find some points that resonated with you, no matter out of whose mouth they came. But you also expressed feelings from disappointment to disgust about the debate itself. What do we get from the debates? We don’t get a clear view of the candidates’ positions on issues; we get a close-up look at posturing. We see how their handlers have prepared them to deliver canned lines and to evade direct questions. We saw finger-pointing and derisive name-calling. Maybe debates have outlived their usefulness, but we’re stuck with them for this election, because no one has come up with a better format in time for us to vote this year.

 

Content