Post-Debate Open Thread

by: sricki

Wed Oct 03, 2012 at 22:48:43 PM EDT



Just for overflow since the other threads are getting long and heading toward confusing-ish.

Yammer on if awake and bored.

sricki :: Post-Debate Open Thread
Tags: , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

Now the Fact-checkers (2.00 / 8)
Muddy the water.  Sigh.  I know what I saw but apparently I was wrong.  Idiots.

How about those of us who are awake and bemused? (2.00 / 10)
Watching the talking heads....is kinda funny.

I still think that no matter what, so long as Romney did not scream "SAVE THE BABIES" and rip open his shirt to expose a bombvest...he was gonna be called the winner by the media sorts.

That having been said....Obama was polite, and in being as such, was kinda run over by the interrupting and rude Romney....who also ignored and interrupted the moderator. The 'visual' of that...was of Romney controlling the debate....and that feeds into the 'won the debate' take that most are taking.

I still can't see his performance winning over any undecideds...Romney was just annoying as all fuck.

Just my 3 1/2 cents.

Photobucket


I'm Not Surprised... (2.00 / 8)
Really.  But someone just said, of Romney, "He had lots of specifics" and I just wondered if I was watching the same debate.

[ Parent ]
I have a rule of thumb (2.00 / 8)
Whatever I think, the rest of the country will believe the opposite.

I'm right about it 9 out of 10 times whether its politics or opinions on music, movies, etc.  


[ Parent ]
You know, by your own logic, (2.00 / 3)
Obama has a 90% chance of winning?

;~)

John Askren - "Never get into a pissing match with a skunk."


[ Parent ]
Actually, (2.00 / 6)
I still think that no matter what, so long as Romney did not scream "SAVE THE BABIES" and rip open his shirt to expose a bombvest...he was gonna be called the winner by the media sorts.

At least he'd have come off as passionate about something. Might have been enough to get him a little upward squiggle.

Certainly good for ratings and replay value, if nothing else.

Come to me in my dreams, and then
By day I shall be well again!
For so the night will more than pay
The hopeless longing of the day.


[ Parent ]
I thought it was boring, but that Romney "won" (2.00 / 7)
I think that Obama played it very cautiously in order to conserve his lead, or possibly because that approach played better with undecided voters, but Romney came across as relatively sincere.  Plus, because Obama did not call Romney out that much, he unfortunately legitimated some of his lies, to some extent.

In any event, I didn't see any game-changing gaffes that would change the outcome of the race.


I grabbed this from the GOS: (2.00 / 12)
From Twitter:

Ali Davis: "Pundits are calling out Obama for not calling out Romney's lies, BUT NOT ROMNEY FOR THE LYING."


Photobucket

I guess that's the point. (2.00 / 8)
Obama didn't provide any soundbites and we stil have 2 more debates to go. I'm guessing the 20 year anniversary and the, you know, job of POTUS were heavy in his mind. I always find it curious when incumbents have debated. Debate prep? (which is all Romney has going)

Getoutofhere.

I think peeps are past the pundits. The polls post debate will be interesting. Speaking for my generation, the internet has completely changed the way we digest news. I am curious about the sway of pundits.  

Just because they are posting on a progressive site doesn't make them progressives. - John Allen


[ Parent ]
I'm With You... (2.00 / 7)
One day the pundits will look past the Kleig lights and there will be nobody there.  Sooner or later; at least for occasions such as this one.

[ Parent ]
My prediction for tomorrow is that POTUS will take the newest (2.00 / 12)
Romney positions on the various issues and smack him upside the head.  And various bloggy types will query, "Where was that guy last night?"

POTUS is campaigning in WI on the morrow and we know how he is in front of a crows post-debate.  

"When Fascism comes to America, it will come wrapped in teh stupid and waving a gun" ~ Esteev on Wonkette


exhibit 1 (2.00 / 6)


"When Fascism comes to America, it will come wrapped in teh stupid and waving a gun" ~ Esteev on Wonkette

[ Parent ]
That's the guys who is going to show up for the next debate. (2.00 / 7)
Betcha ten thousand bucks.

;~)

John Askren - "Never get into a pissing match with a skunk."


[ Parent ]
Romney's Plan to Fix the Economy (2.00 / 8)
-h/t liquidman from dKos

Photobucket  

Photobucket


Seems to be trending... (2.00 / 9)
Photobucket

Photobucket

Photobucket

Photobucket


[ Parent ]
And yet there's more! (2.00 / 6)
bigbird2012

Photobucket

And from the man himself:



Photobucket


[ Parent ]
Gotta say (2.00 / 7)
I didn't watch the debate.  It was 3 AM here and Dr. Strum-wife forbade it.  But waking up to the media reactions put a damper on seeing how thoroughly the Yanks slammed the door on the regular season.  

I don't think the Obama campaign needs to panic.  But I do think that they have to respond.  And strongly.  Romney has run the worst campaign I've ever seen and remained in the ball-park.  Obama's ceiling in both most of the key battlegrounds and nationally seems to be about 49%.  If your ceiling is 52-53%, you can give a point or two.  But the fact is that much of the center of the country is disappointed with Obama, but just doesn't think Romney is competent.  

Romney gave them 'optics' of competence last night.  I don't need to watch the debate to know that.  That's potentially very damaging to Obama.  And the media isn't helping.  Romney could be down by 10 and the right wing pundits would be writing counter-factual arguments about how he's got the Pres. where he wants him.  Obama stumbles and the left-wing pundits rail against him.  One piece up on RCP is calling this a 'Historic Defeat'.  It's a freaking debate, for crying out loud.  

We need to see people like Sully and Matthews talking up what the Pres. did right, even if the snap polls went against him and his demeanor wasn't what they wanted.  But they won't.  

And it's no consolation that there are 3 more.  Romney cleared a bar here and the late-breaking optics whores have been waiting for him to do so.  More people watch debate number 1.  Also, if the economy and domestic policy is the number 1 issue, this was the debate dedicated to it.

It's a loss and we shouldn't try and talk ourselves out of it's potential ramifications.  But the Obama needs to contest it on content immediately.  Otherwise it looks complacent.  And the Jimmy Carter malaise accusation begins to stick.  Remember, Carter won debates with Reagan on substance.  Kerry won debates on substance.  Arguably, Dukakis won debates on substance.   Most who were listening to the first Kennedy-Nixon debate on radio thought Nixon won.  So talking this away and moving on isn't a reasonable option.  And adjustments need to be made.  Now.

The future is unwritten


Yeah... (2.00 / 8)
But how?  I watched a few minutes of Obama's deconstruction of trickle-down economics which I thought to be simple yet brilliantly argued; well tailored to his audience and appropriate to the debate at that point and found out later it was apparently met by a collective national eye-roll.  I'm not a qualified judge of these matters, obviously.

My son watched the whole thing, including the giddy CNN post-debate piling on and said, "You know, I blame reality TV."


[ Parent ]
But there is something weird here (2.00 / 8)
I was watching the tracking lines at the bottom while half listening to a rather dull debate and trying to finish a book I've got to review today

Obama's positives lasted longer and were more consistent than Romney's

I agree with Strum though - this is a bit of a wake up call for the Obama campaign. Mitt will get a bounce because he seemed competent and feigned moderation

But it's all so effing obvious in terms of he media creating narratives to win audiences. Spiff is right about the fundamentals - pundits are less and less rekevant. And nothing Romney can do in the next two debates will compensate for the OFA ground game

Obama seemed a bit off form, and not used to being challenged. That's what elections are for - to challenge power. Romney did everyone a favour by challenging Obama with a modicum of competence. It will be good to see the Pres get back into campaign mode and demolish the suave inconsistencies in Mittonomics

The p***artist formerly known as 'Brit'


[ Parent ]
"Something Weird Here" (2.00 / 6)
Are you referring to the universal media acclaim for the candidate most needing a leg-up to call this a horserace?  I was a bit suspicious even before the debate.

[ Parent ]
Obama's passivity seemed deliberate BTW (2.00 / 8)
And some are saying that this attack ad out of the debates shows the strategy - misplaced though it still may be


The p***artist formerly known as 'Brit'

[ Parent ]
Second thoughts the video is scraping the barrel (2.00 / 6)
A bit rattled I'd say: come one, Team Obama, up your game

The p***artist formerly known as 'Brit'

[ Parent ]
This is the message to press: (2.00 / 6)


John Askren - "Never get into a pissing match with a skunk."

[ Parent ]
Heh (2.00 / 7)
That ad is OK.  Maybe just me but that was what I disliked most about Romney; just another pushy insurance salesman.  

[ Parent ]
Bad news and Good news from Amy Sullivan & Stan Greenberg (2.00 / 8)
Why Dems should not be freaking out

http://www.tnr.com/blog/plank/...

"What Romney accomplished," said one of Greenberg's colleagues in Denver, "was consolidating those Republican leaners who were undecided going into this." As for Obama, Greenberg concluded, "there was no erosion."

"No erosion" is hardly a rallying cry. But while Obama didn't pick up much support in this focus group (33 percent said they would vote for him afterward, compared to 31 percent at the beginning of the evening), he ended up right at his 2008 vote levels. And at the end of the day, if Obama gets the same amount of support as in 2008, distributed the same way across key states like Colorado, he wins. That may be the official spin, but it's also simple arithmetic.

No room for complacency - but no need for hair lighting either

The p***artist formerly known as 'Brit'


[ Parent ]
About that CNN snap poll that everyone is runnin' with: (2.00 / 12)
It seems that those polled were ....all white, all over aged 50, mostly male, had no college education, from the South.

Ummm. Yeah.

How's about they have another poll of ...all black, all under age 30, mostly female, college educated, from the North? I bet that that would find about 87% calling the debate for Obama.

Was I thrilled with Obama's performance? Nah...but, neither was I dismayed. Romney came off as rude...and he lied his ass off...and he is gonna have those lies thrown at him from here until the election.

In the long run I do not see the debate having any substantial positive effect for Romney...AND...I see it as raising the bar for him in the next debates. He will be expected to best Obama again...and I'm just not so convinced it will be as easy as he thinks.

I just honestly cannot see a true 'undecided' watching that debate and 'deciding' to vote for Romney. Snap polls be damned.

Photobucket


[ Parent ]
"he lied his ass off...and he is gonna have those lies thrown at him from here until the election." (2.00 / 10)
Bingo, Kysen.  And nice to 'see' you.  This starts to answer Shaun's question "But how?"

Both the Obama campaign and the left wing punditocracy needs to start doing this immediately and change the narrative.  Right wingers are relentless at working to change the narrative, even at the risk of appearing ridiculous.  Jennifer Rubin is a case in point.  Left wing commentariat is just the opposite.  Perhaps it's because those on the right have so convinced themselves of liberal media bias that they always feel confident contesting its narratives.  And the left is always dismayed when anything seems to confirm the right's counter-narratives.  

Anther way to start, and one connected to Kysen's remark, is to refuse to accept the premise that substance doesn't count.  Fight back against that.  If that's your strength, try and make it matter even if it hasn't in the past.

MSNBC anchors need to have a meeting and coordinate.  Not talking points.  Not distortions.  But emphases.  Writers as well.  

Heck, I'd like to see an ad from the Obama campaign or a super-pac taking this head on.  "Optics over substance?  That's not what campaigns are supposed to be about.  They are supposed to be about telling the truth to the American people."  And it conveniently takes on the right's meme that Obama is more about optics than substance.  Implicitly, without seeming defensive.  We don't really have time for the long game.  Finally, people want to think they are substantive, even when they are not.  The ad wouldn't need to slice and dice anything out of context.  Just rapid fire contradictions and distortions.  Appeal to people's vanity as thinking voters, especially those who aren't.  It's basically what their 'Celebrity' ad tried to do and failed 4 years ago.

The future is unwritten


[ Parent ]
Yeah... (2.00 / 9)
There's a small but confident corner of the punditry convinced that Romney will have some damage control to do over the policy he extemporised but the consensus is, "Gee, he threw some deadly bullsh*t."  Ezra Klein is leading with, Romney's policy vagueness pays off.  Go figure.

My concern is that any attempt at pushback is going to be met with sore loser accusations.  I thought on policy Obama was sound and sober, allowing for Charles Pierce's admonition that we are validating Republican narratives by acknowledging them rather than deriding their premises.  I think we just take the howlers out of Romney's argument and address them one by one as indefensible arguments.

As for Romney's optics, he seemed a bit hyperactive, declamatory, invasive and demanding and I thought Obama playing it cool just made Romney just look worse; but that's me.  That the criteria for a presidential debate was the same as an entertaining bout of professional wrestling never occurred to me.  And what's with progressives?  Some of the comments I've read elsewhere are the most worrisome aspect of the post-debate experience.  What were they expecting?

Sure as eggs if Obama had slammed Romney with the 47% and gotten in his face he would have been scored even worse by the pundits; Obama may not have brought his A-game but I don't think he was trying to do so.  Seems to me to err on the side of calm and presidential was the right idea; he really tried to put the argument in the context of reality.  Talking respectfully to the American public is a risky business, apparently.


[ Parent ]
Really (2.00 / 6)
You don't suppose CNN could have stacked that sample so as to get results that would support the narrative they were looking forward to running with?

If it were done when 'tis done, then 'twere well it were done subjunctively.

[ Parent ]
Honestly (tinfoil hat on) (2.00 / 5)
I think CNN has had a thorn in their butt since State ragged them hard on the Chris Stevens journal thing.  "Sources familiar with his thinking..."  Uh, ok CNN.

Earth is the best vacation place for advanced clowns. --Gary Busey
 


[ Parent ]
Apparently there were other demographics included in the sample (2.00 / 7)
but they were so small they didn't rate their own tabs.

"When Fascism comes to America, it will come wrapped in teh stupid and waving a gun" ~ Esteev on Wonkette

[ Parent ]
Hmmm... (2.00 / 8)
The punditry is giving Obama a merciless pounding which seems, to me, grossly unfair but I'm not going to argue the point (I like wonky Obama.)  Everyone seems to agree.  Still:


...I wouldn't want to even start to guess whether the debate will do Romney any good, even in terms of a temporary bounce, although the fact that the media have been dumping on Romney pretty consistently for a month now probably means that they're in the mood for playing this one up for him.

On the other hand, Romney's policy positions are even more of a shambles now than they were previously. Romney's position, over and over again, is to simply bluff it on policy. His tax plan continues to be the most obvious one, but it really happens across the board. Romney insisted tonight more than once that his tax plan will keep taxes the same for the wealthy, cut them for everyone else, and not add to the deficit. Forget about the Tax Policy Center; just that much is obviously incoherent and impossible. And, more to the point, it's clear he's going to keep on insisting that it adds up, no matter how clearly it doesn't. But it's not just that; on every policy, he's just going to insist that the consequences of his plans that anyone might not like simply don't exist, so that he's for sweeping spending cuts but insists that no particular program that anyone brings up might lose any funding, or that he's for repealing Obamacare but those with pre-existing conditions will magically be protected.

Jonathan Bernstein - Romney strong on performance, weak on policy in sluggish debate Washington Post 3 Oct 12

Sooner or later I guess we will get back to the content and on that basis Romney seemed not just weak but reckless and obstinate.  I must be from another planet.


via Nate Silver (2.00 / 7)
A CBS News poll of undecided voters who watched the debate found 46 percent siding with Mr. Romney, 22 percent for Mr. Obama and 32 percent saying it was a tie.

Still not good.  However, one has to think that the majority of the 32% who claimed it was a tie will break for the incumbent, especially given likability and all.  So consider it a 60-40 split in favor of Romney.  But even some of those who think Romney won the debate might actually vote for Obama, but thought Romney outperformed him this time.  And Romney needs more than 60% of battle ground undecideds anyway.

The problem is that we cannot afford to let the post-debate narrative harden, or some of those numbers will change in the after-effect...  

The future is unwritten


Really? (2.00 / 6)
The post-debate narrative ship has sailed, it seems to me.  As I said to my son earlier the media is always making life miserable for one of the candidates, they've been chewing on Romney's shoes for three weeks it was only a matter of time before they started in on Obama's.  I truly believe that, they weren't going to let a horserace get away from them and if it wasn't this it would be something else more substantive and less transient.

And if we had to choose something for them to get their teeth into Obama's debate performance wasn't the worst of all possible outcomes; he was calm and on point at least as far as substance is concerned.  I say let them worry this for all it is worth until they get Romney's scent again.  The sooner the better.

Who knew he was William Jennings Bryan on financial reform, for example?  His base knows he's lying and they aren't the brightest sparks in the fire; was anyone else really fooled?


[ Parent ]
Exhibit A (2.00 / 6)
For taking this all calmly:


It was not a disastrous night for Obama. That calm, measured approach is part of the reason many Democrats like him and it may appeal to independents too.

Most debates have little impact on the eventual outcome but there have been exceptions, such as the one in 1960 and that between Al Gore and George Bush junior in 2000. While this one will not go down as a comparable game-changer, it will at least change the growing perception of Romney as a loser, even if only temporarily.

Ewan McAskill - Mitt Romney comes out on top as Obama stumbles in first debate Guardian 4 Oct 12

So we have all the more reason to keep turning out; the race was always going to tighten a bit, it seemed to me.  Now it is a determined sprint to the finish.


[ Parent ]
Exhibit B (2.00 / 8)
How long did this take?  It was in the damn spin room:


After the first presidential debate at the University of Denver in Colorado on Wednesday night, one of Mitt Romney's top advisers acknowledged that, as a result Romney's plan to repeal Obamacare, people with pre-existing medical conditions would likely be unable to purchase insurance.

The admission directly contradicts the GOP candidate's claim during the debate that "pre-existing conditions are covered under my plan" - a contention Romney has repeated on the trail and that his campaign has repeatedly walked back.

Brian Beutler - Top Romney Adviser: States Will Have To Cover People With Pre-Existing Conditions Under President Romney TPM 3 Oct 12

So lie brazenly about your policy and then walk it back the moment the cameras are off but before the auditorium is empty?  I'm not sure this is going to be a winning strategy; innovative, to be sure, but inherently flawed.


[ Parent ]
That's the main point: (2.00 / 7)
they've been chewing on Romney's shoes for three weeks it was only a matter of time before they started in on Obama's.

Trend lines don't go on forever except in physics (and then mostly in the lab, not nature).

Romney has had the worst campaign in general and worst month perhaps in history. His supporters have vocally and repeatedly torn him to shreds in public. Sooner or later that is going to change at least in an "every dog has his day" manner.

This was that dog's day, but he's still a dog.

Now with one month left he has to either take that and run like a Triple Crown winner to the finish. But he's not one, he's still a dog.

47%

Sweet Jesus.

Medicaid.

Pre-existing conditions.

The housing market is improving.

Jobs are improving.

Somalia is under control.

And OBL is still dead.

John Askren - "Never get into a pissing match with a skunk."


[ Parent ]
There was a couple of times President Obama looked angry, (2.00 / 10)
and was going to jump in, then stopped himself. As much as my inner liberal wanted him to attack, his people are proably smarter than I. Calling people a liar on national TV is risky, even when true. I would hope that they are better prepared to rebutt Romney next time.
 The talking heads on the left seemed distraught, and rather than attribute that to the need for a horserace, I tend to attributte it to their passion for liberal policy and values.
 


Especially when Debating While Black (2.00 / 11)
Obama has been super-cautious ever since he started politicking not to be The Angry Black Man. It's fairly clear that the Rs wanted to goad him into getting angry, or into calling Mitt a liar. Look at Sununu this morning--saying that Obama is "lazy." Going straight out for the race baiting. If Obama had been the least little bit upset, you know Sununu would have said something even worse.

Also, as I've seen discussed on other blogs, Romney employed a debating technique called the Gish Gallop. Duane Gish hails from the Creation Intstitute in San Diego, and loves to debate biologists. He smashes them every time. Always wins.

His technique simply is to keep the lies coming so fast that it actually is impossible to refute them all. Also, he throws in some new lies in every debate, just to keep his opponent off balance.

Works every time, especially if your opponent is honest. Really, you can't beat it, and I assure you, Romney will do this in the next two debates as well.

I think the President did just fine last night. Mitt's lies will come home to roost, and also too, he wants to kill Big Bird and doubled down on voucherizing Medicare (I've read that Plouffe is delighted about that)--thus rendering himself unelectable.

So I'm pretty happy, actually.

Every successful revolution puts on in time the robes of the tyrant it has deposed.--Barbara Tuchman  


[ Parent ]
Agreed (2.00 / 8)
Obama avoided the larger trap.  My real-time reaction was that Romney was digging himself a big hole just for the win on aggressive style.  The two campaigns have radically different ideas about how to pitch their narrative and one of them is a hard-sell infomercial for funeral insurance with lots of small print.  It's up to the American electorate; if they can't see through the Romney calculus after decades of predatory consumerism then losing this election is the least of our worries.  There will be legions of others determined to do likewise in future.

Have voters learned their lesson from the Bush presidency or not?  It couldn't be a starker choice and the outcome is tangible in the personal experiences of one and all.  Is this the hope Obama was talking about in 2008?  It certainly is mine.


[ Parent ]
Great analysis here... but I'm reprinting this.... (2.00 / 6)
Just for pure pleasure

The two campaigns have radically different ideas about how to pitch their narrative and one of them is a hard-sell infomercial for funeral insurance with lots of small print.  It's up to the American electorate; if they can't see through the Romney calculus after decades of predatory consumerism then losing this election is the least of our worries.  There will be legions of others determined to do likewise in future.


The p***artist formerly known as 'Brit'

[ Parent ]
Shucks (2.00 / 7)
Happy to oblige.  Just on the "can't see through the Romney calculus" and "learned their lesson from the Bush presidency or not" argument, here's an interesting bit from the Gore/Bush debates before we reduced our economy to a smoking ruin with unfunded regressive tax cuts.  Just for nostalgia's sake consider they were arguing over what to do with the budget surplus:


GORE: I think that what -- I think the point of that is that anybody would have a hard time trying to make a tax cut plan that is so large, that would put us into such big deficits, that gives almost half the benefits to the wealthiest of the wealthy. I think anybody would have a hard time explaining that clearly in a way that makes sense to the average person.

BUSH: That's the kind of exaggeration I was just talking about. (LAUGHTER)

Jonathan Chait - Would a Republican Candidate Lie About Taxes? New York 4 Oct 12

Ha-ha.  Whose laughing now?  In my simple understanding all of this "trickle-down" economics was never anything but a thinly-veiled and long-standing strategy to starve the government into extinguishing social welfare.  

Nobody really buys it except low-information voters and the half of the punditry who aren't already in on it.  Yet we get it paraded as the centrepiece of the Republican platform for decades even after it has demonstrably and catastrophically weakened our beloved nation.  It's borderline treasonous; am I missing something?


[ Parent ]
bootstraps (2.00 / 5)
It's borderline treasonous; am I missing something?


"When Fascism comes to America, it will come wrapped in teh stupid and waving a gun" ~ Esteev on Wonkette

[ Parent ]
Heh (2.00 / 5)
If I understand you correctly I've never suggested I'm not somewhere to the Left of Emiliano Zapata.  In a very polemic, establishment history published just after the Great War the foreword included the following line:


In dealing with this part of the History, the position of the wage-earning class will be considered equally with that of the capitalist.

The History of the Great European War, W Stanley MacBean Knight, Standard Publishing Company, 1920

Nothing has changed and yet now we deny the obvious.


[ Parent ]
You way overthought me. :) (2.00 / 5)
In my simple understanding all of this "trickle-down" economics was never anything but a thinly-veiled and long-standing strategy to starve the government into extinguishing social welfare.  

Nobody really buys it except low-information voters and the half of the punditry who aren't already in on it.  Yet we get it paraded as the centrepiece of the Republican platform for decades even after it has demonstrably and catastrophically weakened our beloved nation.  It's borderline treasonous; am I missing something?

Those great Americans who came before us were self-sufficient, hard-working patriots who didn't need any stinking government to succeed.  If you had bootstraps you'd lift yourself up and understand this.  Slacker Moocher.

"When Fascism comes to America, it will come wrapped in teh stupid and waving a gun" ~ Esteev on Wonkette


[ Parent ]
Interestingly... (2.00 / 4)
In the US income tax was first levied just before the Great War and the long road to the New Deal commenced shortly thereafter.  The challenge we face as citizens is that the state no longer requires us to fight for it; Vietnam was the last instance.  So it is only natural that the corporations now get the considerations once due the citizenry in that existential bargain.

We are now just expensive bystanders in the affairs of government; to be harvested for tax revenue and begrudged public assistance.  Our industrial age contract with the state has lapsed and nothing tangible has replaced it.


[ Parent ]
Ahem, the first US Income tax was levied (2.00 / 6)
in Aug. 1861 by President Abe Lincoln.

http://www.politico.com/news/s...

You see, hard as it might be to believe, there was once a time when Republican presidents understood that wars must be funded.

The future is unwritten


[ Parent ]
I'm Referring to... (2.00 / 4)
The Sixteenth Amendment of 1913 which formalises federal "income tax" as we know it.  Various taxes levied on income have come and gone since 1812 but this is the one we still pay now and it is beyond the reach of the Supreme Court to overturn, as happened previously.

[ Parent ]
100% true (2.00 / 8)
I can't believe I didn't think of this.  I actually saw Gish debate Creationism v. Evolution against one of my profs (Dr. Michael Erpino) when I was in college.

Earth is the best vacation place for advanced clowns. --Gary Busey
 


[ Parent ]
Hey Green! (2.00 / 5)
Good to see you.

I've had time to chew through the thing and I think you are right.

Obama can read timing and trends as well as anyone, and swinging for the kill would have been less likely a path to victory than holding back and letting the opponent rush by with all his momentum. The punditocracy has followed the Beat Mitt thread as long as they follow anything and short of collapsing on stage would expect and foster a change of tune.

Good martial arts always look to use the strength and inertia of the opponent against them. Romney and the entire GOP machine have been gearing up for last night as the final chance to save some hope. It could have been possible to put a shoulder against the door, but better to open it just before they crash into it and let them stumble through.

Now, we have four weeks for the buzz to wear off and the points to be picked apart.

He wants to kill Big Bird for god's sake, who every single undecided grew up on (and Elmo, who their kids all grew up on). He isn't going to raise any taxes, ever, and still he is going to lower the deficit. Even on the right-leaning news radio here in Tennessee today it was pointed out that this is basically impossible.

I'm with you.

John Askren - "Never get into a pissing match with a skunk."


[ Parent ]
Glad I didn't watch (2.00 / 8)
The tiny fragment I did tune into told me it would have been a miserable time for me.

Here's a bit of good news, via the always estimable P.M.Carpenter:

Here's the first look at that second look. MSNBC held a post-debate focus group of independents. Its members, overwhelmingly, believed Romney dominated the evening's debate. But get this: When asked if any were now supporting Romney, not one focus-grouper said yes. Not one.



If it were done when 'tis done, then 'twere well it were done subjunctively.

It's absurd (2.00 / 7)
Romney didn't end up looking like Vlad the Impaler = win
Romney managed to lie so rapidly Obama didn't know where to start = win

It's all sports commentary. The Daily Beast (ahem) even has an article about how Romney is soaring on a betting site. Some kind of massive 30 per cent shift on an online betting site. The real news, even on that speculative betting model, with a max of a few thousand dollars, Romney rose from 26 per cent to 36 per cent; I.e. from complete loser to loser.

It's such an obvious attempt at 'game changer' media spin I'm wondering where Jerome Armstrong has gone. The pundits get their day of balance, and can pummel Obama and big up Mitt. But nothing has changed - one more turn of the cycle till the inevitable Obama bounce back

Do they really think we're that stupid?  

The p***artist formerly known as 'Brit'


[ Parent ]
"Do they really think we're that stupid? " (2.00 / 5)
Yes.

Don't touch the irony button. There's so much pressure behind it that it may explode on contact.

:~)

John Askren - "Never get into a pissing match with a skunk."


[ Parent ]
Mitt shines like polished gold! eom (2.00 / 3)


[ Parent ]
my general take: (2.00 / 10)
Obama was a little off, but it's hard to say how deliberate most of that was.  I think some of it was simply shock over Mitt's brazen mendacity.  I mean, you come to a debate prepared to challenge your opponents arguments.  Mitt barely made any.  Instead he spewed platitudes that everyone agrees with, and salted them with vague talking points - all of which were either based on faulty logical assumptions, or outright lies.  He sounded like an 'Occupy' guy for a few minutes there.  It was crazy.  I guess that could be lauded as a clever strategy if you were a) desperate and b) prone to short-term thinking.  I thought Obama's arguments were simple and persuasive, and also had the benefit of being true.  That's just me though - I'm hyper-aware of the greater context.

Overall, I found Obama's performance to be largely of the same caliber he demonstrated against McCain in '08, and versus HRC in the primaries prior.  He's always been very cool, measured, and deliberate in debates that I've seen.  That he didn't once mention Bain or the 47% was a clear indication (to me) that he's keeping his powder dry for now. This could be due to caution with respect to 'peaking too early'.  Some of Obama's seeming reluctance to pounce on the more obvious BS is surely related to a sort of 'prevent defense' aimed at protecting his virtually insurmountable lead in the critical swing states.  This could be a strategic miscalculation, but I doubt it.  On substance, Obama obviously won.  On performance/presentation, it's either a tie or a point for Romney.  Cue the fact-checkers, right?  I found it interesting that some of the most scathing criticism of Obama's performance from the punditry has been based on Obama's perceived 'failure to tamp down the lies', while sparing Romney for spending the whole time, well, lying.  Odd, that.  

The most tangible benefit for Romney is that the veneer of credibility Mitt gained will probably invigorate his campaign and rouse his base (who are keen to see the POTUS bloodied), which will help his significantly sagging fundraising efforts.  Still, will this help? The data to date tells us that there aren't enough 'undecideds' to be statistically significant.  The electorate is as polarized as ever.  If Romney won voters last night, it probably wasn't many, so the whole thing is probably too little, too late.  I expect the national tracking polls to show a Romney bump and tightening race, but doubt Obama will see much, if any, erosion in his swing state support.  Early voting is already underway in 30 states (including battlegrounds like Florida, Ohio, Wisconsin, North Carolina, Virginia, Colorado, Nevada, etc.) - places where Obama is winning (and in some cases decisively so).  

For my part, I have confidence in the OFA ground game.  Take Ohio, where no Republican has ever lost and went on to win the Presidency:  Romney has 36 campaign offices there, Obama has 96. Romney and the state GOP have an estimated 130 staffers. Obama has what his state communications director said were "hundreds of staff and thousands of volunteers." Romney started his general election campaigning in May and opened his first Ohio office in early June (he closed his HQ after he won the primary). OFA has been in the state, basically, for five years.

Honestly, I think this thing is in the bag already (and has been for some time).  I'll stay out on the limb with my prediction that Obama wins reelection with 347 electoral votes (including a sweep of the swings).  What can I say, I'm a hopemonger.

Earth is the best vacation place for advanced clowns. --Gary Busey
 


Falsehood is the New Black... (2.00 / 9)
Apparently.  I can't fathom that the guy who says this:


[Romney] suddenly became the moderate Massachusetts governor again.

In the process he disavowed or contradicted virtually everything he's been saying for the past 18 months. He's not cutting taxes for the rich? He's the savior of Medicaid? He loves community colleges and would never think about cutting their funding? And on and on and on and on. It was unbelievable.

Virtually every major assertion he made last night about his proposals was false. The tax discussion was stunning. There must be footage of him at one of the early GOP debates saying exactly the opposite of what he said last night. He does not, in fact, support letting all people with preexisting conditions have access to health insurance. There's a loophole in his position that would affect millions of sick people adversely. But he just says these things.

Michael Tomasky - The Rockefeller Republican Wins Big Daily Beast 4 Oct 12

Follows up with:


Romney caught him totally flatfooted with the Rockefeller Republican move, and Obama didn't know how to respond. If this is the new Romney, he'd better figure out how.

Michael Tomasky - The Rockefeller Republican Wins Big Daily Beast 4 Oct 12

This "new" Romney made twenty-seven false assertions in thirty-eight minutes and Obama better figure out how to respond?  I hope he's not counting on, you know, journalists to do their jobs or anything; those with the wit to "see what is in front of one's nose" and content themselves with highly paid concern trolling.  Sheesh.


[ Parent ]
Every word... (2.00 / 6)
From Ohio to OFA, is what I've been thinking.

The other plus: energise the dem base over Big Bird. That was crazy: vouchers and kill off PBS. He might have roused a bit of Republican hope through the mendacity-blitz, but they know that's not what he's really thinking. Meanwhile, a bigger democratic base will be knocking on more doors in pure terror.

Obama has always been about the long game. Yesterday he was short footed by an amazing bit of Romney policy somersaulting and blather. But I predict the acrobatics will wear out, and the hard laws of gravity apply.

I'm a hopemonger too, though: on the other hand, we've haven't often been wrong have we?

The p***artist formerly known as 'Brit'


[ Parent ]
2010 (2.00 / 6)
Was ugly and voters sat on their hands.  Republicans have been perceptibly shifting the Overton Window for decades and it shows.

The single most important achievement of the Obama administration will be establishing a permanent electoral bastion on which the Right will crash like waves on a rock for a generation; but we need to be vigilant and keep the battlements manned and the watch-fires burning throughout.  We aren't there yet; we need this win to consolidate and cement the coalition of reasonable voters willing to act in their own collective self-interest.


[ Parent ]
Kos has some interesting polling worth locking at (2.00 / 7)
http://www.dailykos.com/story/...

Short version: Mitt picks up some Republicans on favourability, and Obama impresses independents

Most amusing tweet I've seen so far tonight



The p***artist formerly known as 'Brit'

Reuters daily tracking poll from today (2.00 / 6)
has both candidates ticking up one point.  (Although I hate national polls no matter who is winning and am being a hypocrite because I also hate people who point to national polls with the same caveat I used.)

Additionally, OfA broke fundraising record by getting $150 million+ in September.  Can't wait to see Romney's numbers.

"When Fascism comes to America, it will come wrapped in teh stupid and waving a gun" ~ Esteev on Wonkette


[ Parent ]
Holy guacamole (2.00 / 4)
Those are hella good results for Obama!

If it were done when 'tis done, then 'twere well it were done subjunctively.

[ Parent ]
Because the Romney campaign can't help itself ... (2.00 / 6)
Mitt Romney campaign co-chair and former New Hampshire Gov. John Sununu (R) appeared on Fox News on Thursday and took a victory lap following last night's first presidential debate.

Sununu described Obama's performance as "babbling," "lazy," and "disengaged," and dismissed the possibility that he could do better in the future. "When you're not that bright you can't get better prepared," he said. http://thinkprogress.org/elect...  

 Video at the link if you're interested.

Andrea Mitchell later gave Sununu a chance to walk it back and he refused.

"When Fascism comes to America, it will come wrapped in teh stupid and waving a gun" ~ Esteev on Wonkette


"Not that bright"??? (2.00 / 5)
I don't like Gingrich one bit but I would never be stupid enough to call him stupid. He is particularly annoying precisely because he is so smart.

And Obama is way smarter.

It isn't even open for debate whether Obama is a very bright person or not, and anyone undecided at this point knows it. Love him or hate him the guy has a brain the size of a planet.

FOX is not pitching to undecideds, hardly any of them watch it. Those who do - like my Ohio friend - may love the red meat of the right but aren't so far in the bag to swallow complete bullshit.

John Askren - "Never get into a pissing match with a skunk."


[ Parent ]
Apparently this is the new meme. (2.00 / 5)
Someone at Balloon Juice had a quote from Gingrich last week talking about how POTUS is a part-time president who would rather be playing basketball.

I'm not one to see a lot of things as dog whistles but this reaches train whistle status for me.

"When Fascism comes to America, it will come wrapped in teh stupid and waving a gun" ~ Esteev on Wonkette


[ Parent ]
Again, bad call with undecides. (2.00 / 4)
I forget where I heard it today (perhaps on that same local news radio show), but the folks up for grabs are not the ones who hate Obama. They are the ones who like him well enough but don't like liberalism in general.

Making stupid insults - that, yes, sound at least like a whistle in the distance if not more - just makes them look like careless partisan buffoons to anyone who wasn't going to vote GOP no matter who was running.

John Askren - "Never get into a pissing match with a skunk."


[ Parent ]
He left out, "shiftless." eom (2.00 / 5)


[ Parent ]
All this stuff about Mitt's falsehoods misses one central salient point (2.00 / 7)
Early last year, in a stealth move, Mitt Romney purchased mathematics.  He sold off the parts that weren't working for a profit, leaving mathematicians that weren't meeting his productivity demands unemployed and addicted to their own victimhood.  He then reconfigured the remaining math so that it now serves his interests, and those of his investors, with stunning efficiency.

The future is unwritten

lolololololol (2.00 / 3)
that's perfect.  sto.  len.

Earth is the best vacation place for advanced clowns. --Gary Busey
 


[ Parent ]
For Those... (2.00 / 8)
Multitudes wondering why, oh why, didn't Obama bring up the 47% last night it is now clear that he would have been walking into a whiffle-haymaker:


But on Sean Hannity's show on Fox tonight, Mitt Romney was asked what his response would have been had the debate moderator Jim Lehrer, or President Obama, confronted the candidate about the tape.

Igor Bobic - Romney On 47 Percent: 'I Said Something That's Just Completely Wrong' TPM 4 Oct 12

So he had to get Hannity to do it so he could unburden himself of another canned whopper; Obama's team saw that one coming and denied him the audience.  Good, let the Fox viewers decide.


RRomney's repetition. of "100%" in his response just seems (2.00 / 5)
off to me.  Like he was trying too hard.  And now there is another clip to contrast to his I-was-inelegant-but-right response.

"When Fascism comes to America, it will come wrapped in teh stupid and waving a gun" ~ Esteev on Wonkette

[ Parent ]
Oh... (2.00 / 5)
The whole Romney campaign is an exercise in weaponised disingenuity.  I am still recovering from his thrice-denied $5 trillion tax reduction whopper:


"First of all, I don't have a $5 trillion tax cut," he said.

In fact, Mr. Romney has proposed lowering income tax rates, abolishing the estate tax and making other changes that would cost $5 trillion over 10 years. When he says he has no such plan, he means that he intends to make up for the lost revenue by closing loopholes - what's benignly known as "broadening the base." Moreover, he says he can close so many loopholes for rich people that the middle class will end up paying less.

But even if you close every rich person's loophole, you don't save enough money to do everything Mr. Romney wants to do. The Republican cites studies that he says prove that wrong, but when you look closely, they prove him wrong.

Editorial Board - The $5 trillion man Washington Post 4 Oct 12

Here's the funny thing, though.  On the very day that the collective punditry working under the Washington Post masthead are vying to outdo one another with hyperbolic metaphors to adequately describe the magnitude of this same Romney's debate triumph the editors see fit to demolish the centrepiece of his domestic policy and a good two-fifths of his debate argument.  Why don't they just, you know, edit.


[ Parent ]
Saw that and thought the same thing. (2.00 / 8)
Romney wanted Obama to go there. Team Blue knew Romney was super duper uper prepared because he was prepared to flip the script.  

Just because they are posting on a progressive site doesn't make them progressives. - John Allen

[ Parent ]
my favorite headlines from teh google news trends (so far) this morning: (2.00 / 7)
Unemployment Rate Falls to 7.8

http://online.wsj.com/article/...

(VI guy called this within 0.1% a day or two ago)

September jobs report a huge boost for Obama as unemployment rate tumbles

http://www.guardian.co.uk/busi...

Report: Obama campaign earns $150+ million in Sept.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-25...

Romney's 'takeback' of '47 percent' diatribe unconvincing

http://blogs.ajc.com/jay-bookm...

Earth is the best vacation place for advanced clowns. --Gary Busey
 


obama's job performance (2.00 / 9)
all time high at 55%

Howard Dean is my guy. (in a strictly nonsexual fashion)

[ Parent ]
Bad news (for Rmoney) comes in threes (2.00 / 8)
1. The jobs report. Totally undercuts the prime rationale for Mitt's candidacy.

2. $150M Obama Campaign Sept. haul ($35 was mine). Could Oct. be $250M? (I'll kick it to $100) In the biggest upset of CW, Obama+SuperPACs may top Romney+SuperPACs. If so, the Scalia SC may overturn Citizens United.

3. The media narrative post-debate is changing from "Romney Rules" to "Liar!Liar! Big Bird Fire!"

The polls will probably be all over the place for the next week, but after that, it will be all Obama.

There was only one joker in L.A. sensitive enough to wear that scent...and I had to find out who he was!


[ Parent ]
I really try to mitigate my blinders. (2.00 / 4)
But Obama just looks smarter than the last time I looked at him each time I look at him.

Sully lost his mind because he thought Obama was playing rope-a-dope. But so did Howard Cosell, and Muhammed Ali was still the champ.

Romney rushed in through the door and partied like a rich kid while Obama sat quietly in the corner suggesting that peeing in the corner was going to cause trouble in the end. The other kids didn't think Obama was being cool enough, but he is now cooperating with the police while the other kid is sitting in the back of the patrol car.

If the pundits are smarter than the candidate he shouldn't be President.

John Askren - "Never get into a pissing match with a skunk."


[ Parent ]
I have a quibble with rope-a-dope (2.00 / 5)
as the metaphor. Obama instead gave Rmoney enough-rope-to-hang-himself.

O/R had 2 distinctly different goals and strategies going into the debate. David Plouffe gave a non-spin statement that they were talking directly to the independent voters. What he didn't say is that they also pitched strongly to women voters. Anecdotal info from the blogs uniformly shows that women were turned off by Romney. Typical comments are that he reminds them of their 1st husband. Obama directly addressed their concerns on education, health care and caregiving of the elderly (which falls overwhelmingly on daughters).

Romney, on the other hand, needed to change the dynamic of his losing campaign. He accomplished that, but it is a high risk strategy that, like McCain's choice of Palin, can (and will) backfire bigtime.

The interesting news today is that it appears the Obama team anticipated Romney's walk-back of "47%" and didn't give him that opening in the debate. I'll wait for Chris and Ed to offer their apologies.

There was only one joker in L.A. sensitive enough to wear that scent...and I had to find out who he was!


[ Parent ]
Sure, they both work. (2.00 / 6)
Ali let Foreman wear himself out, which works, as does playing out the rope and letting the other person fashion the noose.

The trend lines during the debate consistently showed a female preference for Obama every time I looked. That's half the voter base.

And he wants to kill Big Bird. He so didn't need to say that (how many parents had their kids watch with them?).

John Askren - "Never get into a pissing match with a skunk."


[ Parent ]
Employment Prediction Scorecard (2.00 / 9)
Toot-my-own-horn edition

Todays topline BLS Sept. report:
Jobs: +114K
U3:   7.8%

On August 11th, I wrote:

For my next trick, I'm predicting that the BLS employment numbers for August, September and October will be good to explosive on the upside. This is because the seasonal adjustments have been out of whack for the last 3 years.

Bain/Pain 2012 - Deja vu all over again

Yesterday, my comment:

This leads me to believe that the Friday BLS report will be +175K jobs and U3 of 7.9%
The potential fall in U3 may be due to distorting seasonal adjustments.

Good employment numbers from ADP

At first blush, my U3 number was close, even mildly pessimistic, and my jobs number was off by 61K. However, consider the following from the NYT:

This month, that information showed that the economy gained 86,000 more jobs in July and August than previously thought, ameliorating earlier worries about a slowdown in August hiring.

Combining the revisions with the September numbers, the new jobs report effectively shows a gain of 200,000 jobs in the business survey.

Jobs Report Brings Unexpected Good News for Obama

So with the (upward) revisions July->September U3 is 8.3->7.8 and jobs are +437K.
A good October report just before the election would be icing on the cake.

There was only one joker in L.A. sensitive enough to wear that scent...and I had to find out who he was!


i had been looking forward to today's report (2.00 / 8)
specifically to check your predictions from (IIRC) a couple weeks ago?

Stellar work.

Howard Dean is my guy. (in a strictly nonsexual fashion)


[ Parent ]
Seen on twitter: (2.00 / 8)
"Obama approval numbers at 3-year high, unemployment numbers at 3-year low, Big Bird still alive, Osama Bin Laden still dead."


John Askren - "Never get into a pissing match with a skunk."

MOOOOOSE! I'm trying to help a friend find a job here please pass along (2.00 / 7)
Photobucket

"I honor the place in you where Spirit lives
I honor the place in you which is
of Love, of Truth, of Light, of Peace,
when you are in that place in you,
and I am in that place in me,
then we are One."  Namaste Friends!


He has to get in line with everyone else. (2.00 / 10)


John Askren - "Never get into a pissing match with a skunk."

[ Parent ]
Look out a movement has been born! (2.00 / 10)
Photobucket

"I honor the place in you where Spirit lives
I honor the place in you which is
of Love, of Truth, of Light, of Peace,
when you are in that place in you,
and I am in that place in me,
then we are One."  Namaste Friends!


[ Parent ]
OMG!!! ROFLMAO!!!!!!! (2.00 / 7)


Just because they are posting on a progressive site doesn't make them progressives. - John Allen

[ Parent ]
OMFG! (2.00 / 7)
I so want that on a t-shirt.

"When Fascism comes to America, it will come wrapped in teh stupid and waving a gun" ~ Esteev on Wonkette

[ Parent ]
I want that on a t-shirt (2.00 / 5)
on my 2 year old daughter. You can't start them too young. Viva Oscar!

There was only one joker in L.A. sensitive enough to wear that scent...and I had to find out who he was!

[ Parent ]
Whoa! The BLS Truthers (2.00 / 8)
may be on to something. A president did try to exploit the BLS. Well duh, it was Nixon:

According to journalistic accounts and documents, the task fell to Nixon aide Fred Malek, who first counted high-ranking Democrats at BLS using voter registration lists and then identified employees with "Jewish-sounding" names.
...
In 2007, Timothy Noah of Slate publicized a previously unreleased 1971 memo from Malek suggesting he was much more closely involved in a BLS purge then he had claimed, outlining a reorganization that resulted in the demotions of at least four high-ranking Jewish employees.

Now, here's the totally cool part from the article:

He [Malek] is now a top fundraiser for 2012 Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney.

There was one president who tried to manipulate BLS

Jack Welch, along with Dick Cheney, is on my short-list of Those-whose-graves-must-be-pissed-on.

There was only one joker in L.A. sensitive enough to wear that scent...and I had to find out who he was!


comment at redstate tonight: (2.00 / 5)
Nightly News just trumpeted the 7.8% The sound bite overides any explanation to the public when the report doesn't make sense. Think low information voter.

I almost feel sorry for this one.

Earth is the best vacation place for advanced clowns. --Gary Busey
 


NPR tore apart that yesterday. (2.00 / 7)
Some folks don't understand Washington. The BLS folks are simply not going to fudge numbers, the whistleblowers would be talking to the media before the Command From On High was finished.

Talk down the economy, again. Lower the spirit of the people, slow down growth, do any amount of harm in order to get power.

The GOP has lost its everloving mind.

John Askren - "Never get into a pissing match with a skunk."


[ Parent ]
Projection, always projection (2.00 / 6)
After all, it's what they'd do in the same circumstances.

If it were done when 'tis done, then 'twere well it were done subjunctively.

And now Steve Forbes is a jobs truther. (2.00 / 5)
But has Teh Donald weighed in yet?

"When Fascism comes to America, it will come wrapped in teh stupid and waving a gun" ~ Esteev on Wonkette

[ Parent ]
Heyzoos Criste (2.00 / 5)
How about aliens? Illuminati?

Maybe it is Gremlins...

John Askren - "Never get into a pissing match with a skunk."


[ Parent ]
Search




Advanced Search
Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


Blog Roll
Angry Bear
Angry Black Lady
Balloon Juice
Black Kos
Booman Tribune
Charles P. Pierce
Crooks and Liars
Daily Kos
Five Thirty Eight
Huffington Post
Juan Cole
Maddow Blog
P.M. Carpenter
Political Wire
RumpRoast
Scholars & Rogues
Smartypants
Stonekettle Station
Talking Points Memo
The Field
Washington Monthly
Wonkette
Moose With Blogs
Atdleft
Barr
BorderJumpers
BTchakir
Canadian Gal
Charles Lemos
Cheryl Kopec
Curtis Walker
Douglas Watts
Hubie Stubert
Intrepid Liberal
ItStands
Janicket
JoeTrippi
John Allen
LibraryGrape
MichaelEvan
National Gadfly
Peter Jukes
Senate Guru
Zachary Karabell




Back to Top

Posting Guidelines  |  FAQ  |  Privacy Policy  |  Contact the Moose  |  Contact Congress
Powered by: SoapBlox