Posted in: Politics

Watch The Presidential Debate Live Online [Video]

mitt romney

It’s time for the first Presidential debate of 2012.

President Obama and GOP candidate Mitt Romney will take the stage tonight at 9 pm EST at the University of Denver. The event will be hosted by Jim Lehrer of the PBS NewsHour.

If you’re looking to watch tonight’s debate, you have plenty of options. In fact, it would be more difficult to find a way not to watch the debate. The 2012 Presidential Debate will be broadcast live on PBS, NBC, ABC, CBS, Fox, CNN, CNBC, Fox News, MSNBC, C-SPAN, and Univision.

If you can’t watch it on TV, you still have plenty of options. AOL, Yahoo, and Google will all be offering live streams of the event. You can also watch coverage from tonight’s event below.

Now that you know where to watch, let’s talk about how to interact.

Twitter users can used the hashtags #debates and #deneverdebate to comment on tonight’s event. Google will also have a Google Plus hangout for people to talk about the debate. The Huffington Post is also opening several forums for tonight’s debate here.

OK, so we’ve got traditional TV, live streaming video on the internet, and places to chat. Now let’s spice things up with a few presidential debate games. You can learn how to play debate bingo here, or, if you’re hoping to throw a few back tonight, check out the Inquisitr’s debate drinking game.

To get things started, here’s a pre-video of tonight’s debate.

Here are a few live streams of the 2012 Presidential Debate. The action starts at 9 pm EST. Are you going to watch the debates tonight?

Articles And Offers From The Web

Comments

12 Responses to “Watch The Presidential Debate Live Online [Video]”

  1. DREGstudios! Art & Design

    Obama is simply going to wipe the floor with him. Romney is a rich pariah who simply can’t identify with ANY average American through his fog of lies and network of havened money. He’ll only continue to get booed out of the room by every group of minority and middle class voters he comes across. His religion and wealth is highly elitist and everyone in this country has had it with his kind. We’re telling Mitt he can’t buy this election! Read about the role of his money and his Magic Mormon Underwear are playing in the polls at http://dregstudiosart.blogspot.com/2012/05/mitt-romneys-magic-mormon-underwear.html.

  2. Janice Moore

    I care about our country and I am going to watch the debates.

  3. Susan Huddleston Edgerton

    Lehrer did not do a good job. He seems to think it is ok to interrupt the President, allow Romney to as well, and allow Romney to interrupt Lehrer himself and override the rules. OK, now Romney is harping on the green company support again… but WHERE is the topic of global warming in this debate? Nowhere, as usual. The imminent extinction of human and many other species is not even on the table. And NOBODY gets education.

  4. Maily Cyrus

    Romney came across as competent, genuine, clear in his goals and was concise in his explanations of his plan. Watch First Presidential Debate 2012 Barack Obama vs Mitt Romney full recorded video here:

    http://su.pr/2SiezU

  5. John Stempien

    Dumbass!! Global warming? How about millions of Americans out of work. Needs to be a balance in our society and its leaning to far left!

  6. Taylor Upchurch

    She is not a dumb ass. When we (humans) don't survive the next mass extinction whether the cause is man-made or not,we certainly contribute, we will see who needs a job then.

  7. Susan Huddleston Edgerton

    And . . . from Bill McKibben on climate change deniers: "The best of them — and that would be Marc Morano, proprietor of the website Climate Depot, and Anthony Watts, of the website Watts Up With That — have fought with remarkable tenacity to stall and delay the inevitable recognition that we’re in serious trouble. They’ve never had much to work with. Only one even remotely serious scientist remains in the denialist camp. That’s MIT’s Richard Lindzen, who has been arguing for years that while global warming is real it won’t be as severe as almost all his colleagues believe. But as a long article in the New York Times detailed last month, the credibility of that sole dissenter is basically shot. Even the peer reviewers he approved for his last paper told the National Academy of Sciences that it didn’t merit publication. (It ended up in a “little-known Korean journal.”)

    Deprived of actual publishing scientists to work with, they’ve relied on a small troupe of vaudeville performers, featuring them endlessly on their websites. Lord Christopher Monckton, for instance, an English peer (who has been officially warned by the House of Lords to stop saying he’s a member) began his speech at Heartland’s annual conference by boasting that he had 'no scientific qualification' to challenge the science of climate change."

  8. John M. Parker

    /sigh So to 'confirm' that validity of your beliefs on climate change, you point to a notably liberal news organizations article (run entirely by liberals since the recent death of their only conservative voice in March)? And Mr. McKibben is no neutral party: he has even been arrested (albeit for peaceable assembly) due to his environmental-activist stance… So you're trying to assert that the accuracy of Christopher Monckton's intelligent and logical arguments against global climate change (and really, the issue of conformity in the scientific community) must some how also be called into question over biased reports, quotes, and a Lordship quarrel?

  9. Susan Huddleston Edgerton

    Simply saying someone or some publication is "liberal" does not discredit it. Why don't you direct me to one, or some, that you call "neutral." Mainstream scientists agree that we are experiencing anthropogenic climate change, and that the pattern we see in increased frequency of monster storms or "100 year" storms (we've had 4 of those where I live in the past two years) is consistent with that. 97+% of scientists who study this agree. If your only rebuttal to me is to call my sources "liberal" and your guy Monckton "intelligent and logical," then I don't see an argument. Maybe you'd agree that the Christian Science Monitor is a fairly "neutral" rag? Here's something interesting from them: http://www.csmonitor.com/Environment/Bright-Green/2009/0928/companies-desert-the-climate-deniosphere And why is it that insurance companies and other businesses (except maybe the fossil fuel businesses!) are preparing for climate change? How about Schwartzenegger and Google Earth? Are they "liberal"? http://www.csmonitor.com/Environment/2009/1202/google-earth-offers-a-vision-of-post-global-warming-california