ChrisWeigant.com

Biden Unleashed

[ Posted Thursday, October 11th, 2012 – 20:56 PDT ]

Yesterday, I predicted the media would use some pugilistic terminology to talk about the vice-presidential debate, before it happened, to hype the event in an effort to get more people to tune in. But I must admit, I didn't really expect the event itself to live up to the billing.

Tonight was truly the "Fight of the Attack Dogs." Or, as they were calling it locally, the "Thrill in the Ville II." And it was actually worthy of a boxing promoter's overenthusiastic label. But, comedy aside, the feeling I was left with was that what we just all saw was the very first "cable television debate." That requires an explanation, since cable TV has actually been around in a big way since the 1980s. Cable news has really only come into its own in the past 15-20 years or so, and it has ushered in a much feistier style of debate between politicians -- complete with interruptions, talking over each other, snide and dismissive laughter, and occasionally even screaming as loud as you can. Tonight, we saw what a national debate looks like in this style for the first time that I can recall.

To put it another way, I've quite simply never seen anything like what we all just witnessed between Paul Ryan and Joe Biden. It was something completely new. Whether it will prove to be a good thing or a bad thing, positive to our national discourse or negative, it was indeed a unique experience, at least for me. Perhaps the final two presidential debates will pick up on the new style, who knows?

Although, perhaps not. A lot of what happened tonight was due to the personalities of the two participants. Maybe Mitt Romney and Barack Obama are incapable of the same type of performance. We'll see.

Previous debates at the presidential/vice-presidential level have had some contentious moments, to be sure. There have been some very sharp and pointed back-and-forths between candidates in years gone by. But never has the level of the fracas stayed so high for so long during a single debate, I would venture to guess. Never have the knives been sharper all evening long. Never has so much blood been left on the floor afterwards. It's easy to pick from the back alley no-holds-barred, no-punches-pulled metaphors this evening, it seems.

I write this column, as always, before seeing what all the other pundits have to say. I find this avoids falling into the "groupthink" trap, personally. This can also lead to my conclusions being wildly different than everyone else's, as (in all fairness) happened last Wednesday after Obama's first debate with Romney. I also am loath to actually call "winners" and "losers" in debates, because I think it is extremely rare that anyone actually does "win" or "lose" a debate.

Having said all of that, Joe Biden won tonight's debate. There's just no other way to put it.

Paul Ryan did an admirable job of attempting to mount some sort of defense, but it was precisely that -- a defense, at best. Ryan has been rumored to be easy to provoke, and he remained mostly unflappable tonight. He did almost lose his train of thought a few times, but quickly recovered (to be fair, Biden lost track a time or two himself). But Ryan was clearly outclassed all evening long.

For the first hour, the pressure was relentless. Biden unleashed just about everything Obama forgot to, last week. Each time, you could see Ryan sink a little lower in the water. Biden's finest moment of the night was probably when he brought up the two letters Ryan had sent to him "begging" for some of that awful Obama stimulus money. Ryan absolutely deflated at this point.

Much will likely be made about body language. I'd like to take a moment here to offer up an observation that few have probably made about last week's debate before I talk about tonight. Last week, I thought Barack Obama and Mitt Romney both did fairly well at what they had set out to do. I watched last week's debate on PBS. They didn't use the camera shot that all the other networks apparently used. PBS showed each man as he spoke, and rarely if ever showed what their opponent was doing while they were speaking. All the other networks showed the debate as a split screen. The point I'm trying to make is I think there were shades of the Kennedy/Nixon debate in the analysis. For anyone who heard the famous debate on the radio, Nixon appeared to win. For those who saw it on television, Kennedy clearly won. This was due to body language. I think, in last week's debate, that Mitt Romney won and Barack Obama lost by their body language while the other man was talking. I've gone back and seen split-screen clips, and I can see what everyone was talking about.

Tonight, I watched on a split screen. This was another reason why Biden was the clear winner tonight. Biden wasn't just in his element, he was downright enjoying himself throughout the debate. He couldn't wait to get his answers out, and he was constantly smiling and even laughing at the points Ryan was trying to make. Ryan tried looking cool and collected when Biden was talking, but he came off after a while as almost flinching, waiting for the next body blow.

The entire debate was at an extremely high energy level until the moderator brought it back down to Earth with a discussion on religion and abortion, at roughly the one-hour mark. The moderator, in general, did a pretty good job of moving the discussion along and not being too much of a referee of niggling details like "the clock," which at times threatened to get out of hand but for the most part seemed to work. There were a few instances when Ryan and Biden talked over each other so loudly you couldn't make out what either was saying, but I think the moderator was slightly shocked at the ferociousness of the action herself, a little bit.

I don't blame her. I know I was. As I said, this was the most stunning debate at either the presidential or vice-presidential level I think I've ever witnessed in my life. It's like I went to a movie theater expecting to see an Aaron Sorkin film and instead sat through a Quentin Tarantino slasher-fest. The word that kept popping into my mind while watching was "brutal."

The role of a vice president or vice-presidential candidate on the campaign trail is that of attack dog. Joe Biden, in this traditional role tonight, was completely "unleashed." If you'd like a more erudite metaphor, how about Shakespeare? "Cry 'Havoc,' and let slip the dogs of war." I'm so downright stonkered by what I witnessed this evening that I can't even focus on my own notes taken during the debate, which I'll have to address in tomorrow's talking points instead.

This was, clearly, one debate which not only lived up to it's boxing metaphor billing, but was actually more intense than even the hyperventilatory media sold it as. That is saying something, indeed. This debate will be looked back at through history as the beginning of a new era in American televised debates -- for better or for worse.

-- Chris Weigant

 

Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant

 

99 Comments on “Biden Unleashed”

  1. [1] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:

    This one's for you, LizM.

    He earned it.

    :-)

    -CW

  2. [2] 
    Chris1962 wrote:

    I liked tonight's debate. I think Joe didn't do himself any favors, nationally, with the sneering and cackling, but it ought to do something in terms of cheering the base up, I would think.

    CNN has it as a draw:

    "Forty-eight percent of voters who watched the vice presidential debate think that Rep. Paul Ryan won the showdown, according to a CNN/ORC International nationwide poll conducted right after Thursday night's faceoff. Forty-four percent say that Vice President Joe Biden was victorious. The Republican running mate's four point advantage among a debate audience that was more Republican than the country as a whole is within the survey's sampling error...."
    http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/10/11/cnn-poll-on-debate-winner-ryan-48-biden-44/?hpt=hp_t1

  3. [3] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Chris,

    I almost missed this as I'm so dead tired at the moment.

    The only poll I heard about had Ryan winning the debate by four points. Whatever.

    There is just never enough time to call out the nonsense emanating from the Republican cult of economic failure and foreign policy disaster.

    Funnily, enough, I was sitting rather calmly as I watched the debate unfold and got almost exactly what I expected. I didn't think Ryan would be so good, though, at spewing his usual nonsense with Biden sitting just a few feet away. I was surprised by some of the asinine "talking points' Ryan uttered that left Biden salivating and showing little patience for that kind of ineptitude.

    I guess what I'm trying to say is that the debate tonight proceeded much as I had expected. If anything I thought Biden would have been a bit more forecful in calling out the dangerous behavior of the Congressional Republicans - Ryan most included! - as one of the reasons why the economic recovery has progressed so slowly. The line might have been that the Republicans stopped putting country first on the day Obama was inaugurated.

    Anyway, that was an excellent piece and a real thrill to read!

    Have a lovely evening ... I'm going to bed.

  4. [4] 
    Chris1962 wrote:

    The CBS poll shows much better numbers for Joe: 50% to 31%. The sample is a little funky, though.

    "58 percent call themselves independents, 17 percent identify as Republicans, and 25 percent say they are Democrats."

    http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57531059/poll-biden-takes-debate-over-ryan-uncommitted-voters-say/

  5. [5] 
    tommymccarthy wrote:

    "Having said all of that......Joe Biden won tonights debate....There's just no other way to put it."

    Thank you for that Chris.......as well as for ALL of your often herculean efforts in service of democracy
    TM

  6. [6] 
    Michale wrote:

    With the UTMOST respect to Liz.......

    Biden was petulant, sarcastic and rude..

    If THOSE are qualities that are required to "win" a debate, then Biden won hands down..

    On the other hand, knowledgeable, sincerity and clarity are factors that I admire..

    In that, Ryan clearly won the debate..

    Biden didn't have any knowledge in his corner so he spent the time smirking and laughing every time Ryan spoke.

    Biden was the class goof off, trying to throw the smart kid off track because Biden can't compete at that level....

    It was painful to watch our Vice President Of The United States stoop to such low levels of civility...

    In short, he was the quintessential Biden. The crazy uncle at the family Thanksgiving Dinner that everyone hopes doesn't do or say anything stupid..

    And he did...

    Michale.....

  7. [7] 
    Michale wrote:

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/republicans-biden-laughed-issues_654261.html

    This is exactly what the Independents and NPAs saw last night..

    Biden didn't do Democrats or Obama any favors..

    Romney's momentum will continue and likely get larger as a result of this debate..

    It will be interesting to see if polls will still dominate the discussions here in Weigantia. :D

    Michale

  8. [8] 
    Michale wrote:

    In the most disgusting twist of the entire Libya debacle, the Obama Administration has now blamed Camp Romney for the debate over the administration's Benghazi response..

    In short, the Administration feels that the American people should just shut up about it.

    I am sure that the Bush Administration felt the same way about Abu Ghraib, which was far FAR less serious then a US ambassador being brutally murdered along with 3 other Americans in a terrorist attack..

    I know that no one here wants to talk about Libya. I understand that it's impossible to defend the indefensible. I get it...

    But, unfortunately for everyone here, I like to crow a little when I am so dead on ballz accurate. :D

    And, unfortunately for the Obama Administration, Camp Romney has them by the short and curlies. This is an issue that the American people clearly side with Camp Romney on...

    It's doubtful that Team Obama will recover... It's Carter v Reagan all over again..

    Michale.....

  9. [9] 
    Michale wrote:

    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1012/82313.html

    I report. You decide.. :D

    Michale.....

  10. [10] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Chris,

    Oh, now you're Jack Kennedy!?

    Did Biden actually say that?

    Well, there is only one thing to say about that. You and Joe Biden are on the same wavelength.

    Which is, essentially, something I have long surmised. :)

  11. [11] 
    Michale wrote:

    Liz,

    Are you referring to CB or CW???

    And yea, Biden DID say that. I guess he was trying to channel his inner Lloyd Bentson (as an aside, my brother actually did IT tutoring for Bentson during the campaign.. :D) but Bentson's Kennedy quip came in response to something Quayle actually said..

    Biden's Kennedy quip was out of the blue...

    Michale

  12. [12] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Thank you for that Chris.......as well as for ALL of your often herculean efforts in service of democracy TM

    Hi TM!

    It is always such a pleasure to hear from you! And, you have a refreshing knack for getting to the crux of the matter. This piece was Chris Weigant being Chris Weigant and if Joe Biden never wins another MIDOTW award, then I'm OK with that. :)

    Take care, TM ... and don't be such a stranger around here!

  13. [13] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Hi Michale,

    Nice to have you back.

  14. [14] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Chris,

    This was, clearly, one debate which not only lived up to it's boxing metaphor billing, but was actually more intense than even the hyperventilatory media sold it as. That is saying something, indeed. This debate will be looked back at through history as the beginning of a new era in American televised debates -- for better or for worse.

    That's because the media still don't know who Biden is and they never will.

    As for a new era in American televised debates and whether this debate will be seen as a change for the better or worse ... well, that will depend on whether people appreciate champions of the truth or whether they rather enjoy hearing a bunch of "stuff" from their elected leaders. The jury is definitely still out on that.

  15. [15] 
    Michale wrote:

    Nice to have you back.

    Thanx Liz... :D

    Yep, I am back to my old obnoxious and arrogant self.. :D

    Michale

  16. [16] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Glad to hear it, Michale!

  17. [17] 
    michty6 wrote:

    Michale,
    Biden was petulant, sarcastic and rude..
    If THOSE are qualities that are required to "win" a debate, then Biden won hands down..

    If you haven't watched the first debate yet you should. This is pretty much what Romney did and was deemed the clear winner by almost everyone - not on substance but because of this exact style.

    I don't really think much (positive or negative) of Biden but tonight he was excellent. Ryan appeared very sleazy (my gf's word, not mine!) in his efforts to duck answering the actual questions or trying to rebut what Biden was saying. In fairness to him though, he didn't just pull a Romney and lie about his record - he tried to defend it.

    If you didn't watch the debates just watch the closing statements - they summed up things perfectly: Biden was emotional, heartfelt and empathetic; Ryan was sleazy, sales-man like and did not engage at all - his closing statement was an info-mercial (seriously, watch it again)!

    PS. The clear winner, aside from Biden, was the debate moderator! She was excellent.

  18. [18] 
    michty6 wrote:
  19. [19] 
    tinsldr2 wrote:

    You wrote "he was constantly smiling and even laughing at the points Ryan was trying to make."

    Biden seemed to find everything from Libya to Iran to unempolyment hil-arious! Even a PBS correspondent called his mugging for the camera "really, really inappropriate."

    Yes laughing about unemployed Americans and dead ambassadors very presidential there Joe.

    You wrote "There were a few instances when Ryan and Biden talked over each other so loudly you couldn't make out what either was saying, "

    According to one preliminary count, Biden interrupted Ryan 96 times. Ryan interrupted six times.

    What you really mean was Biden was boorish and interrupting constantly.

    Of course the moderator was neutral, cutting off Ryan and changing topics as he was making points.

    But hey just because in the 90s Obama was at her wedding and her Husband is an Obama appointee at the FCC and her hubby was at the Obama's wedding 20 years ago is no reason to think she would be biased right? ;)

  20. [20] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    With the UTMOST respect to Liz.......Biden was petulant, sarcastic and rude..

    I appreciate that.

    Now, how many times did Ryan interrupt Biden? I can't recall one example of where Ryan really interrupted Biden. Can you?

    There is a reason for that disparity, Michale.

    It' very hard to interrupt someone who you know is telling the truth and essential to interrupt someone who is constantly spewing misleading and false statements.

  21. [21] 
    michty6 wrote:

    Tins,
    What you really mean was Biden was boorish and interrupting constantly.

    Didn't you watch the first debate? It is funny how when Romney tries this style he is universally declared the outright winner; but when a Republican gets thumped by this style Fox et al are outraged!

    It also doesn't surprise me that the right is jumping behind their candidate even though he got panned. Conservatives in America are much better than this than Liberals. Conservatives would never have let their leader take as much crap as Obama took in the past week after the debate. No way in hell. I can only imagine what their outrage would've been if the 1st debate was switched and Obama was declared the winner universally by the press - their heads would be exploding in outrage at this 'bias'!

    But hey just because in the 90s Obama was at her wedding and her Husband is an Obama appointee at the FCC and her hubby was at the Obama's wedding 20 years ago is no reason to think she would be biased right? ;)

    I love the right-wing conspiracy world. It is so far out of touch with reality it amazes me. If you seriously think that the details of the debate, especially the moderators, but right down to the colour of the chair they sit in, the angle of the chair, the elevation of the stage, the colours of the table (etc) are not jointly approved by both parties beforehand you really do live in a fantasy world...

  22. [22] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    michty,

    Conservatives would never have let their leader take as much crap as Obama took in the past week after the debate. No way in hell.

    That is an extremely salient point.

    The Democratic response, in general, to Obama's first debate performance was to pan it and some of them didn't even wait until the debate was over!

    This despite the fact that Romney used most of his time during the debate to spew misleading and false information and to hide what his own polices would mean to the country as a whole.

    Why would the Democrats not come out punching after that first presidential debate and take over where the president left off, making the case for staying the course and not going backward to repeat failed polices as the Republican cult of ecnomic failure and foreign policy disaster wish to do? I guess it's simply a case of Democrats being Democrats, God bless 'em.

    If the Democratic pundits had continued the good fight by focusing their criticism on the non-serious proposals of the Romney/Ryan ticket, then I dare say that the veep debate last night would have been billed as nothing more than a sleeper.

  23. [23] 
    Chris1962 wrote:

    You wrote "he was constantly smiling and even laughing at the points Ryan was trying to make."

    Biden seemed to find everything from Libya to Iran to unempolyment hil-arious! Even a PBS correspondent called his mugging for the camera "really, really inappropriate."

    Yes laughing about unemployed Americans and dead ambassadors very presidential there Joe.

    Joe's getting quite a bit of flak for that. He also dug the administration into a deeper hole last night by denying that the Libyan consulate had asked for more security, which is the opposite of what came out in the congressional hearings. Expect the administration to throw Joe under the bus.

  24. [24] 
    michty6 wrote:

    Liz

    Couldn't agree more. 2 things struck me as very odd in the aftermath of the debate:

    (1) That Democrats and their supporters panned the President so much. This seems like a pretty stupid strategy in a 2 person election. It is no surprise there has been such a swing to Romney when this is how one party treats their own leader! It took them far, far, far too long to turn their attention to the lies/fantasy world Romney created during the debate, by which point the damage was already done.

    (2) That the Conservatives were so overjoyed with Romney's performance! I mean sure they have had a bad time in 2012 with Romney's stuttering campaign. But the guy, who they pushed for months into adopting their positions, basically reversed every single position (their positions!) in the debate! No more Trickle Down apparently. Regulations? They're great! Healthcare? Why yes I do like Romneycare!

    All of this - completely ignored by Conservatives.

    Then of course, Romney 2 days later goes on Fox and says the 47% comments were 'completely wrong'. Now where are all the far-right crazies who AGREED with the 47% comments and thought that Romney was making a great case that he should make the centre-piece of his campaign? Funny, we haven't heard much from them recently!

    So basically Conservatives have decided:
    (a) They believe Romney is simply lying to get the Presidency and will turn to the far-right policies they like once elected - they are totally fine with him lying to get elected. In this sense Romney is their perfect leader: a guy who can completely lie to appear moderate before unleashing his real agenda (like a CEO in a hostile takeover).

    or

    (b) They believe he is telling the truth but are so desperate to get rid of Obama that they'll actually elect a guy who copies all of Obama's policies but at least he is a white version of Obama!

    Either way, you can see that even when their guy breaks every single policy that they like, as Romney did during the debate, they will still rally behind them. Liberals are too honest and nice on this front, they would never do this. And it cost them the chance to put the nail in the coffin for this election - now the race is on again!

  25. [25] 
    michty6 wrote:

    It's amazing to read the reaction.

    1 week ago: President Obama is calm, unflustered, respectful and solid. Conservatives pan his performance, he was 'destroyed' in the debate! Romney was aggressive, confident, energetic, forceful - he showed true leadership!

    1 week later: Paul Ryan was calm, unflustered, respectful and solid. Conservative say this is just what we need in a leader! Biden was far too aggressive, far too confident, too energetic and too forceful - not what America needs in a leader!

    Amazing.

  26. [26] 
    akadjian wrote:

    Liz,

    For the record, I thought Biden was outstanding. When all the pundits have is "he was condescending" you know he did well.

    Ryan is supposed to be the brains of the Republican party.

    Yet the guy who is supposed to be the Republican genius was beaten by Biden, a guy who Republicans claim is a walking gaffe machine who can't talk and touch his nose at the same time.

    Biden ...

    All they could say is ... he was condescending.

    LOL. They say that about everyone that doesn't agree with them.

    On foreign policy, Biden cornered Ryan into being unable to identify how a Romney administration would be different.

    He emphasized that we could do more for the economy if Republicans would "get out of the way".

    And he called Ryan on his BS.

    "Stop talking about how you care about people. Show me something. Show me a policy. Show me a policy where you take responsibility."

    This is a great line. Because Republicans have never taken responsibility for anything. In fact, it's the title of Romney's book "No Apology".

    Got that? Conservatives can never be wrong and will never apologize no matter how screwed up their ideas are. Even when they say two things which directly contradict each other.

    Here's another great Biden quote calling out the contradictions in the Republican party:

    "And, by the way, they talk about this Great Recession if it fell out of the sky, like, 'Oh, my goodness, where did it come from?' It came from this man voting to put two wars on a credit card, to at the same time put a prescription drug benefit on the credit card, a trillion-dollar tax cut for the very wealthy. I was there. I voted against them. I said, no, we can't afford that. And now, all of a sudden, these guys are so seized with the concern about the debt that they created."

    And when Ryan brought up the stimulus, Biden pointed out how Ryan was right there asking for money.

    And Biden held his own on Medicare and Social Security by talking about what would happen if people are given vouchers. They don't keep up w/ costs. This is how the plan is designed to "save" money. Simply don't give people enough.

    Biden has nothing to be ashamed of Liz. I think he won handily. And Mr. Smartest Guy in the room didn't look so smart. He looked like a salesman peddling a bunch of BS. Now Obama just needs to do the same.

    -David

  27. [27] 
    akadjian wrote:

    p.s. Welcome back, Michale! Hope everything is as good as can be given the situation.

    p.s.s. Forgot to give you a shout on, CW, on the body language comment in the Obama/Romney debate. A few other people framed this as a "style" win for Romney, but I think your analysis is defter. I would still think Romney made his case better and Obama needs to be sharper and more aggressive, but if he had simply projected himself better, people would have had much more positive reactions. Solely in terms of content, I believe the debate was closer than most people's perception.

  28. [28] 
    akadjian wrote:

    Crap, that second comment should have read "Forgot to give you a shout out, CW, on the body language ..."

    Where's the editor around here? :)

  29. [29] 
    Michale wrote:

    You seem to be saying that Romney acted like Biden..

    Did Romney laugh at Obama??

    No..

    Did Romney constantly interrupt Obama??

    No..

    Did Romney do theatrics and crap like that??

    No...

    You say Romney demeaned Obama..

    I say Obama demeaned himself...

    There is absolutely NO comparison between Biden and Romney.

    Romney acted like a leader, fully in command of the facts and the reality..

    Biden acted like the class clown, covering his own ignorance..

    Did Romney exaggerate?? Sure.. It's a campaign after all.

    You really can't knock Romney for that, since you give Obama a pass for all HIS exaggerations..

    Comparing Romney to Biden is like comparing Reagan to Blutarsky...

    Not that I am saying Romney is a Reagan.. But Biden is definitely a Blutarsky...

    Michale.....

  30. [30] 
    Michale wrote:

    Ya wanna talk about Libya and the polls, michty?? :D

    David,

    Thanx... It was really great to see my brothers, which I haven't seen since 2001...

    http://sjfm.us/temp/037-a.jpg

    Of course, would be nice if the circumstances were different, but.. Still good to see them..

    Michale.....

  31. [31] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    David,

    I think Biden handled this debate precisely like he has handled every other debate - in grand style and armed with the facts in context.

    I don't understand why Americans aren't all clamouring for another vice-presidential debate. Because, let's face it, Barack Obama is no Joe Biden! :)

  32. [32] 
    Michale wrote:

    Biden ...

    All they could say is ... he was condescending.

    Actually, "they" said a lot more than that... :D

    But why rain on ya'alls parade.. :D

    Michale.....

  33. [33] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Michale,

    Try as you may, you'll never rain on my parade.

    But, it is so much fun watching you try. :)

    When is Thanksgiving?

  34. [34] 
    akadjian wrote:

    You seem to be saying that Romney acted like Biden.

    Huh?

    There is absolutely NO comparison between Biden and Romney.

    On this I can't argue since I never said any such thing.

    I do believe that Biden would have called Romney on all his BS (as he did Ryan).

    You make my point about Biden for me, though, Michale.

    You don't mention any of the arguments at all. Just like the conservative media. You focus only on attacking him as a person. Why is that?

    And if Biden is a Blutarsky, what does that make Ryan? Sarah Palin?

    -David

    p.s. Toga, toga, toga! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=18eaNSxhK5c

  35. [35] 
    Michale wrote:

    Liz,

    Try as you may, you'll never rain on my parade.

    But, it is so much fun watching you try. :)

    When is Thanksgiving?

    hehehehehehe It's gonna be a fun holiday season...

    I just hope ya'all won't be too dejected by a Romney win to post...

    David,

    You seem to be saying that Romney acted like Biden.

    Huh?

    Actually, that was directed to michty.. Sorry.. :D

    And if Biden is a Blutarsky, what does that make Ryan? Sarah Palin?

    Ya'all wish!!! :D

    No matter how ya'all try to spin it, Biden did not do Team Obama any favors..

    At BEST, Biden catered to the base.. People that were going to vote Obama/Biden anyways..

    The Independents and NPAs just sadly shook their heads and muttered, "whatta jackass..."

  36. [36] 
    Michale wrote:

    You make my point about Biden for me, though, Michale.

    You don't mention any of the arguments at all. Just like the conservative media. You focus only on attacking him as a person. Why is that?

    Because a knowledgeable jackass is STILL just a jackass... :D

    Michale.....

  37. [37] 
    akadjian wrote:

    Because, let's face it, Barack Obama is no Joe Biden! :)

    Heheheh ... well played :)

    -David

  38. [38] 
    akadjian wrote:

    Because a knowledgeable jackass is STILL just a jackass... :D

    Or, more likely ... because Biden looked better.

    The gaffe machine takes down conservative-proclaimed conservative genius ... gotta love it! :)

    -David

  39. [39] 
    Michale wrote:

    Liz,

    Because, let's face it, Barack Obama is no Joe Biden! :)

    On THAT, we are in complete agreement!!! :D

    David,

    Or, more likely ... because Biden looked better.

    Not really...

    You can be the smartest guy in the room.. But if you are an arrogant ass about it, it won't make a bit of difference..

    One only has to see the dynamic with me here at CW.com to know this is true...

    :D

    But in this case, Biden doesn't have the leadership to make an arrogant attitude stick...

    Michale.....

  40. [40] 
    akadjian wrote:

    But in this case, Biden doesn't have the leadership to make an arrogant attitude stick.

    Huh? Leadership = arrogance?

    Have you been reading the 10 Rules of Pimping?

    http://deadspin.com/5935090/the-10-rules-of-pimping-as-written-by-an-actual-alleged-pimp

    -David

  41. [41] 
    Michale wrote:

    Leadership != arrogance

    I am simply saying that if you SHOW great leadership, you can get away with being an arrogant jackass...

    Biden/Obama has NOT shown great leadership, ergo they can't get away with being a jackass...

    If being right all the time allowed one to be a jackass, no one here at CW.COM would ever have a problem with me.. :D hhehehehehehehehe

    Michale.....

  42. [42] 
    Michale wrote:

    Biden/Obama has NOT shown great leadership, ergo they can't get away with being a jackass...

    Libya, anyone??? :D

    Michale.....

  43. [43] 
    michty6 wrote:

    David,
    Come on you just don't get it! When Romney is arrogant it is great leadership; when Biden does it is is condescending and disrespectful! :)

    Michale,
    The Independents and NPAs just sadly shook their heads and muttered, "whatta jackass..."

    Well there was only 1 post-debate poll of undecideds (by CBS) the result showing that Biden absolutely walloped Ryan by 50-31. The poll had something like 58% independents. I don't even see people on the right even arguing that Biden lost, they are just arguing that he was too smiley or something stupid like that...

    Be interesting to see if there is any movement in the ACTUAL polls after this. Funny how Ras/Gravis/WeAsk weren't so quick to release post debate polls today like they were on 4/10 ;)!

  44. [44] 
    Michale wrote:

    I mean, com'on..

    Biden was laughing when Libya was being discussed. He was LAUGHING when Iran acquiring nukes was being discussed..

    NO ONE here finds that the LEAST bit disturbing???

    I can't help but wonder how HORRENDOUS it would be if it was a person with an '-R' after their name that was laughing???

    Michale.....

  45. [45] 
    Michale wrote:

    Michty,

    Be interesting to see if there is any movement in the ACTUAL polls after this

    So, you DO want to talk about polls, eh?? :D

    Michale.....

  46. [46] 
    Michale wrote:

    FLORIDA: R 51% 0 44%... VIRGINIA: R 51% O 44%...

    Wanna talk about polls??? :D

    Michale.....

  47. [47] 
    michty6 wrote:

    Lol funny how you like polls now.

    I'll be happy to talk about polls. If Romney wins Florida, Colorado, Virginia and North Carolina where do you think the other Electoral Votes that he needs will come from?

    Basically in addition to all these he needs at least one of the following combinations:
    - Ohio
    - Wisconsin + any other battleground
    - Iowa + Nevada
    - Pennsylvania
    - Michigan

    I don't think any of these combinations look great for him, even with his current poll boost where he behind in ALL of these States. And that's WITH his debate bump.

    (NB. Romney is still behind in Virginia on the RCP Average too. Since the debate only Florida and Colorado have tipped his way (NC was already narrowly his))

  48. [48] 
    michty6 wrote:

    PS. The Iowa + Nevada combination leaves it tied at 269-269, so Republicans would have to hold the House for Romney to be President but this is pretty likely in a tied election...

  49. [49] 
    Chris1962 wrote:

    It came from this man voting to put two wars on a credit card

    Biden also voted for both wars. So what is he talking about?

  50. [50] 
    Michale wrote:

    Lol funny how you like polls now.

    Actually, I feel the same about polls that I have always felt..

    I just thought it funny how NO ONE wants to talk about polls now.. :D

    That's OK.. We can talk about Libya...

    PS. The Iowa + Nevada combination leaves it tied at 269-269, so Republicans would have to hold the House for Romney to be President but this is pretty likely in a tied election...

    RCP has 156 EC votes up for grabs.

    Obama's SOLID and LIKELY states have dropped to *SEVEN*...

    Go ahead.. Spin that... :D

    David et al....

    It doesn't really matter what you think about Biden's performance.

    It doesn't really matter what *I* think about Biden's performance..

    It only matters what the undecided voters think about Biden's performance..

    Can we agree on that???

    Michale.....

  51. [51] 
    Michale wrote:

    Let's do a Fact Check on Biden...

    “By the way, they talk about this great recession like it fell out of the sky–like, ‘Oh my goodness, where did it come from?’ It came from this man voting to put two wars on a credit card, at the same time, put a prescription drug plan on the credit card, a trillion dollar tax cut for the very wealthy.
    I was there, I voted against them. I said, no, we can’t afford that.”

    -Joe Biden

    The wars Biden is talking about are the Afghan and Iraq wars..

    Biden voted for both...

    Anyone wanna tell me again how Biden has command of the "FACTS"???

    Michale.....

  52. [52] 
    michty6 wrote:

    RCP has 156 EC votes up for grabs.

    Yup I was quoting RCP. As things stand in RCP-land the electoral college shows Romney losing 294-244.

    It doesn't really matter what you think about Biden's performance.
    It doesn't really matter what *I* think about Biden's performance..
    It only matters what the undecided voters think about Biden's performance..
    Can we agree on that?

    100% agree. This is why I referenced the CBS report before.

    Btw at least 43 million people watched (likely to be 50m+ once full data is available). Sadly there has not been ONE poll including data from today (12/10). That already suggests to me Biden won given how fast the right-leaning pollsters were out the door after the last debate - all 3 right-leaning pollsters had polls out with data on 4/10! Time will tell I guess.

  53. [53] 
    michty6 wrote:

    Did Biden vote in favour of the prescription drug plan or the Bush tax cuts? Because he is also referencing them in that statement.

    And from Wikipedia:
    The Bush administration rejected an effort Biden undertook with Senator Richard Lugar to pass a resolution authorizing military action only after the exhaustion of diplomatic efforts.

    In October 2002, Biden voted in favor of the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq, justifying the Iraq War. While he soon became a critic of the war and viewed his vote as a "mistake", he did not push to require a U.S. withdrawal

    He supported the appropriations to pay for the occupation, but argued repeatedly that the war should be internationalized, that more soldiers were needed, and that the Bush administration should "level with the American people" about the cost and length of the conflict

  54. [54] 
    michty6 wrote:

    A friend sent me this as part of our discussions into 'why on earth do Americans vote for Republicans??'. It is actually pretty relevant to this post debate discussion:

    a. Republicans own the public discourse. They have created a fantasy world (much like Disneyworld) that has captured the imagination of Americans. Low taxes, balanced budget, low regulations, free markets. All good in theory. Never mind practice. The imagery hits Americans at a visceral level - it is so strong that we stop thinking and vote against our best interest.

    Democrats have failed in creating such mythic imagery. There is nothing visceral in their appeal. Hence, the electorate is extremely sensitive to everything they do or not do, and jump to a republican candidate each chance they get.

    b. Democrats offer bitter medicine that no one wants (green energy, recycling, regulation, clean air, gay marriage, equal rights, women's rights). Republicans promise a return to Mayberry, where everyone was happy, everyone knew their place, and it was such fun.

    c. Democrats are distinctive in terms of lacking fire. They don't say things like: "we are against it if you are for it," or, "we are working to make Bush a one-term president." Working class and middle class white males see that as a sign of weakness (remember, these guys are into ammo, guns and Nascar).

    d. Democrats will not bring a gun to a gun fight. But will cry "foul" every chance they get.

    Ergo, Democrats are the modern American Greek tragedy. Fail spectacularly.

  55. [55] 
    Michale wrote:

    Yup I was quoting RCP. As things stand in RCP-land the electoral college shows Romney losing 294-244.

    You must be in a different dimension again..

    Because the RCP poll I am looking at shows Obama with 201 (Solid and Likely) EC votes, Romney with 181 (Solid and Likely) EC votes and 156 EC Votes in TossUp status...

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/2012_elections_electoral_college_map.html

    And the gap is closing more and more...

    This is the reality...

    Michale.....

  56. [56] 
    Michale wrote:

    If you get too bogged down in defending Biden, we can always talk about how there was absolutely NO DEMONSTRATION at the Benghazi Consulate prior to the terrorist attack..

    EXACTLY as I said....

    Matter of fact, you would be hard pressed to find ANYTHING about the Terrorist Attack at the consulate that I was wrong about.

    Funny thing is, I had my intel right within 12 hours of the attack..

    It took Obama another 10 days to catch up with me...

    Maybe I should be President, eh? :D

    Michale.....

  57. [57] 
    Michale wrote:

    Amazing that no one wants to fact check Biden..

    "Syria is a different country, it is five times as large as Libya geographically."
    -Joe Biden

    Actually, Libya is 9.5 times larger than Syria...

    :^/

    “With regard to the assault on the Catholic church, let me make it absolutely clear, no religious institution, Catholic or otherwise, including Catholic Social Services, Georgetown Hospital, Mercy Hospital, any hospital, none has to either refer contraception, none has to pay for contraception, none has to be a vehicle to get contraception in any insurance policy they provide. That is a fact.”

    Yet, there are 35 lawsuits pending against HHS, many from Catholic institutions that are being forced to provide free contraception...

    We have already touched on Biden's false claim that he voted against the Iraq and Afghanistan wars...

    Like I said before. Ya'all just LOVE to Fact Check Republicans....

    Maybe ya'all should get your own house in order first...

    Just a suggestion... :D

    Michale

  58. [58] 
    michty6 wrote:

    Michale,

    Try the RCP no toss-up poll. 294-244 just now. That's a high point for Romney in 2012 too!

    But yes, Obama is indeed still leading in the toss-up version too, as you correctly pointed out. This is also an all time Romney high lol.

    "Syria is a different country, it is five times as large as Libya geographically."
    -Joe Biden
    Actually, Libya is 9.5 times larger than Syria...

    Lolololololol amazing. This is seriously the best you can do??

    Lol don't make me start to fact-check Ryan. We all know how well that went down last time... This is the guy who referred to the "Government takeover of healthcare" in his closing statement, a phrase that Politifact called the LIE OF THE YEAR in 2010: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2010/dec/16/lie-year-government-takeover-health-care/

  59. [59] 
    Michale wrote:

    Lolololololol amazing. This is seriously the best you can do??

    Do you deny that what Biden said was complete bullcrap???

    So, let me guess..

    When GOP'ers get the facts wrong, it matters.

    When DEMs get the facts wrong, it doesn't matter...

    Could you POSSIBLY be more biased???

    Facts are facts, michty.. They are either right or wrong..

    Biden's facts were wrong.

    Period..

    Deal with it...

    But yes, Obama is indeed still leading in the toss-up version too, as you correctly pointed out.

    Yes, Obama is leading.. By a LOT less than he was..

    That's because the American people saw how good Obama is at lying and how lousy he is at protecting American interests...

    Even Intrade has Romney up to almost 40% and climbing fast...

    Your boy is going down, michty... He is going to lose and going to lose big...

    7 Nov is going to be like Christmas around here... :D

    Michale....

  60. [60] 
    Michale wrote:

    You either fact check or you don't fact check.

    You don't get to pick and choose which facts you will check and which ones you don't...

    It's against the rules... :D

    Michale......

  61. [61] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Michale,

    What issue is the overriding issue of concern to you in this election campaign and what makes you choose one ticket over the other as being the best to address that issue?

  62. [62] 
    akadjian wrote:

    What I find amazing Michty is that 4 years after the financial crisis our nation is actually considering electing a guy who is Mr. Wall Street and whose #1 priority is to give a tax cut to the top 1% of $150-250K and a tax cut to the top .1% of $750k-1.2 million per year that he in no way specifies how he will pay for it.

    If we elect someone with this philosophy, our country truly deserves to be robbed blind.

    -David

  63. [63] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    David,

    No, that's the old Mitt. The new and renewed Mitt is the champion of the middle class!

  64. [64] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Where's Michale?

  65. [65] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Chris1962

    Biden also voted for both wars. So what is he talking about?

    He was talking about the budget and how the Bush administration took the cost of the wars off the books, so to speak.

    He was quite clear about that.

  66. [66] 
    Chris1962 wrote:

    He was talking about the budget and how the Bush administration took the cost of the wars off the books, so to speak.

    They're traditionally kept off the books so that our military can have the resources they need without it being politicized — y'know, like liberals have been politicizing the costs since day one.

  67. [67] 
    Michale wrote:

    Where's Michale?

    Michale went ni ni.. :D

    What issue is the overriding issue of concern to you in this election campaign and what makes you choose one ticket over the other as being the best to address that issue?

    My biggest issue is the third-world country status that this country has attained..

    I am voting for Romney because I gave the Democrats a chance to fix things and they screwed things up even more...

    Will Romney do better?? Dunno. Hope so..

    But it's damn sure that Romney can't do any worse..

    As far as I am concerned, Obama is Carter on steroids...

    David,

    and whose #1 priority is to give a tax cut to the top 1% of $150-250K

    Even if that were true, it's infinitely better than a president who has shredded the Constitution, solely for the reason of increasing the power of the Executive Branch of the Federal Government...

    Ya'all remember the Constitution, right?? It was the document that ya'all were willing to defend to your dying breath.... RIGHT up until the time we had a Dem President. THEN it just became an annoyance to overlook and ignore...

    Romney at his worst will be 10 times better than Obama at his best...

    Michale.....

  68. [68] 
    akadjian wrote:

    Even if that were true, it's infinitely better than a president who has shredded the Constitution, solely for the reason of increasing the power of the Executive Branch of the Federal Government.

    Huh? This makes no sense.

    Republicans have blocked nearly all his legislation through the power of Congress. A check on power from the Constitution.

    Similarly through the Supreme Court. Also a check on power from the Constitution.

    I'm sorry, Michale, but what you're saying simply makes no sense.

    If we're dumb enough to put someone from Wall Street in charge 4 years after these very same Wall Street philosophies almost took down our country, we truly deserve to be robbed.

    We deserve to have our country looted because we keep believing the lies that if we were just less lazy and if we just gave the wealthy more, somehow everything would trickle down and we'd be ok.

    You can keep believing if you want, Michale, but no amount of Obama-hate Limbaugh marketing is going to convince me that returning to these policies will work.

    Do you really believe someone who says he's going to give us all a 20% tax cut that somehow won't add to deficit (but he can't tell us how he's going to do it)?

    -David

  69. [69] 
    akadjian wrote:

    p.s. Does this mean ra-rah, Obama? No. But Obama is not proposing the biggest redistribution of wealth upwards since the Bush tax cuts. So he'll likely get my vote.

  70. [70] 
    Michale wrote:

    Matter of fact, you would be hard pressed to find ANYTHING about the Terrorist Attack at the consulate that I was wrong about.

    Funny thing is, I had my intel right within 12 hours of the attack..

    It took Obama another 10 days to catch up with me...

    Strange how no one wants to talk about this, eh? :D

    Michale.....

  71. [71] 
    Michale wrote:

    With regards to polls, ya'all just ask yourselves one question...

    How many states did Obama have a lock on a couple weeks ago??

    By "lock" I mean, how many states were SOLID and LIKELY for Obama??

    How many are there now that are SOLID and LIKELY for Obama???

    Not worried yet???

    :D

    http://tinyurl.com/85qsefo

    :D

    Michale.....

    Michale.....

  72. [72] 
    Michale wrote:

    Republicans have blocked nearly all his legislation through the power of Congress.

    Yes they have and thank the gods they did. Because if they hadn't we would already be like Greece instead of just heading that way.

    Besides, the only reason ya'all are perturbed about GOP obstructionism is because the GOP does it so much more effectively than the Democrats. :D

    I'll address the rest in a few. Running behind.. :D

    Michale

  73. [73] 
    Michale wrote:

    FLORIDA: R 51% 0 44%... VIRGINIA: R 51% O 44%...

    Wanna talk about polls??? :D

    If not, we can talk about Libya...

    Michale

  74. [74] 
    Michale wrote:

    If we're dumb enough to put someone from Wall Street in charge 4 years after these very same Wall Street philosophies almost took down our country, we truly deserve to be robbed.

    Why not??

    We were dumb enough to put someone in office who had absolutely NOTHING going for him, save some really awesome oratory and a '-D' after his name...

    It works both ways, David..

    Do you really believe someone who says he's going to give us all a 20% tax cut that somehow won't add to deficit (but he can't tell us how he's going to do it)?

    Why not??

    I believed Obama when he said he was a different kind of politician, that there were no RED or BLUE states, but only a UNITED States..

    You hold Romney to his word on EVERY word he says..

    Yet, you give Obama a pass on EVERYTHING..

    Once again.. It all works both ways...

    Michale.....

  75. [75] 
    Michale wrote:

    Sorry about #73.. It was posted from work yesterday and I guess it didn't make it all the way thru til this morning..

    DOH!! :D

    Michale

  76. [76] 
    Michale wrote:

    Yet, you give Obama a pass on EVERYTHING..

    OK, my apologies. That was a bit hyperbolic.. Hyperboliscious???

    Let me amend that to say that there is VERY little, if any, slams against Obama for things of substance...

    Sure, ya'all slam Obama in relation to how he deals with Republicans..

    But NO ONE here has slammed Obama for how he runs the country...

    So, either ya'all are cowed by the '-D' after his name and don't want to be on record bucking the Party line..

    Or ya'all completely agree with everything Obama has done vis a vis running the country...

    Either way, that's bad...

    This Libya issue is a PERFECT example...

    Michale.....

  77. [77] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Michale,

    My biggest issue is the third-world country status that this country has attained..

    Well, I'm not sure if you are being deliberately vague about what is the most important issue for you in this election but, would I be correct to assume that you are most concerned about the economy and who is best equipped to improve the economic recovery?

  78. [78] 
    Michale wrote:

    would I be correct to assume that you are most concerned about the economy and who is best equipped to improve the economic recovery?

    You would...

    Obama and the Democrats have already PROVEN beyond any doubt that they are only capable of frak'ing up the economy..

    Let's put a business man in charge who actually has a successful record, a STERLING record in creating successful businesses...

    Michale.....

  79. [79] 
    akadjian wrote:

    Once again.. It all works both ways.

    No. It doesn't.

    Obama does not have a plan to give massive tax breaks to the people sponsoring him in the election.

    It's just that simple. But I know. You're fighting a war w/ liberals. So you have to support your man no matter how much he's going to screw the country.

    I just want you to remember, Michale. Because I know you won't believe me now. But someday, whether it's this election or later, the trickle downers will likely return to power because they simply have so much money backing them. And when they do ... and when they 'eff up the country even more ... I just hope you start to see that it's the philosophy of supply side economics which is the problem.

    Not Obama. Not Romney. But the idea that if you give tax cuts to the rich it will trickle down to the rest of us. It simply doesn't happen. The other effect of this is that the rich do not spend as much as the middle class and this has the effect of dragging down the economy.

    If you want to grow the economy, you need a thriving middle class.

    -David

  80. [80] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Michale,

    Obama and the Democrats have already PROVEN beyond any doubt that they are only capable of frak'ing up the economy..

    Let's put a business man in charge who actually has a successful record, a STERLING record in creating successful businesses...

    You are dead wrong, Michale.

    First off, the Republicans' strategy of sharply cutting government spending in the wake of this global financial crisis has been proven a failure in every other country which has implemented such a strategy.

    Secondly, the Republican strategy involves gutting the Dodd-Frack Act thereby eliminating effective financial regulatory reform. Here's a bit of priceless irony - I've heard people say that Dodd-Frank doesn't go nearly far enough and therefore they will be voting for Romney/Ryan! It would be laugh-out-loud funny if it wasn't so depressingly pathetic.

    Additionally, Romney continues to push a tax plan that simply does not add up, anyway you slice it.

    There is no reputable study that demonstrates that the Romney/Ryan plan will do anything to stimulate economic growth. Which, by the way, his plan is heavily dependent upon. There is a plethora of evidence that their reliance on drastically cutting government spending (except, of course, on the military - an outfit which Romney/Ryan have shown no understanding of) will send the economy into a tailspin that will cost Americans dearly.

  81. [81] 
    Michale wrote:

    Obama does not have a plan to give massive tax breaks to the people sponsoring him in the election.

    No???

    Let's recall the last 4 years..

    Who has made out better..

    The middle class?? Or corporate donors??

    Once again, you are operating under the mistaken assumption that Obama and the Democrats are somehow BETTER than Romney and the Republicans.

    You operate under this assumption despite MASSIVE amounts of evidence that prove it's false..

    I just want you to remember, Michale. Because I know you won't believe me now. But someday, whether it's this election or later, the trickle downers will likely return to power because they simply have so much money backing them. And when they do ... and when they 'eff up the country even more ... I just hope you start to see that it's the philosophy of supply side economics which is the problem.

    I am willing to concede the possibility.

    Are YOU willing to concede the possibility that you MIGHT be wrong??

    That a President Romney just MIGHT bring us back to the prosperity of the Reagan/Clinton years??

    Can you concede this??

    If you want to grow the economy, you need a thriving middle class.

    Agreed..

    Yet, the middle class has taken hit after hit after hit during the Obama years..

    But don't tell me. Let me guess.

    THAT is all the Republicans' fault... :^/

    Liz,

    As we have seen with Obama, a candidates "plan" is absolutely NO guarantee of what actually happens..

    Can we agree on that??

    Ya'all preached massive amounts of good and prosperity under Obama and the Democrats, based on their "plans"...

    You were wrong..

    Isn't it possible that all your gloom and doom predictions under Romney will ALSO be wrong???

    Michale....

  82. [82] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    You just keep on getting it wrong, Michale! That's because you live in a fantasy world.

  83. [83] 
    Michale wrote:

    You just keep on getting it wrong, Michale! That's because you live in a fantasy world.

    Well, considering my track record of late, ya'all might be pretty surprised.. :D

    Michale.....

  84. [84] 
    akadjian wrote:

    Once again, you are operating under the mistaken assumption that Obama and the Democrats are somehow BETTER than Romney and the Republicans.

    I am operating under the fact that Obama has not given massive tax breaks to wealthy people.

    I am also operating under the fact that Romney has pledged to give a 20% tax break to everyone and somehow pay for it by eliminated deductions.

    Any guess whose deductions he's going to gut? Let's see ... he won't say. My guess is the home owner deduction. Probably charitable deduction. Healthcare. All of the middle class/poor tax deductions.

    So he gives everyone a tax break but leaves the loopholes for the wealthy intact. Guess who really gets the tax break?

    That's why he won't tell you the details of his plan.

    But like I said, if America believes Romney will really help anyone but the middle class, we deserve to be looted.

    Yet, the middle class has taken hit after hit after hit during the Obama years.

    Like what?

    Yeah, the economy is still anemic, but the government is not talking about outright redistribution of wealth to the rich.

    We've almost recovered from the damage this philosophy inflicted the first time, if we return to this philosophy, like I said, we deserve to be robbed.

    -David

  85. [85] 
    akadjian wrote:

    But like I said, if America believes Romney will really help anyone but the middle class, we deserve to be looted.

    Whups ... this should read the 'wealthy'. Crap.

  86. [86] 
    akadjian wrote:

    Isn't it possible that all your gloom and doom predictions under Romney will ALSO be wrong?

    I said the same thing about Bush's policies. And I was right.

    And I actually felt sorry for Bush. But I did not believe in his ideas. Look around at the effects of 2 wars + deregulation + tax cuts for the rich.

    Can you show me how Romney plans on doing anything differently?

    His plan:
    - Tax cut for rich, loopholes for rich, plug loopholes for everyone else so the tax cut is not equal for everyone.
    - Go to war with Iran
    - More deregulation for Wall Street, insurance industry, etc, etc, etc.

    If Vegas had odds for another economic crisis under Romney, I would place a lot of money on it.

    Now you have to understand, the wealthy don't care about another crisis. Why? Because they can weather it and usually come out of it owning even more.

    -David

  87. [87] 
    Michale wrote:

    I said the same thing about Bush's policies. And I was right.

    Which policies were those??

    The ones that kept this country completely safe from terrorist attacks for 7 years??

    The policies that Obama adopted and expanded on???

    Look around at the effects of 2 wars + deregulation + tax cuts for the rich.

    Obama has de-regulated 20 times more than Bush...

    Can you show me how Romney plans on doing anything differently?

    No, because Romney's plans are only vapor-ware..

    I CAN show you how Obama's plans have nearly bankrupted this country and put us on the same path as Greece....

    Now you have to understand, the wealthy don't care about another crisis. Why? Because they can weather it and usually come out of it owning even more.

    And what has Obama done to make the middle class' life better??

    Not a damn thing...

    The middle class is worse under Obama.

    And THAT is what you are defending??

    "What exactly are you defending, Captain? The right to wage war? The right to decimate entire populations on a planetary scale? Is this the right you are defending?"
    -Ayleborne, STAR TREK, Errand Of Mercy

    Can you show me ANY definitive proof that Americans are better off under Obama and the Democrats??

    No, you cannot..

    So, the *ONLY* logical action is to give Romney a chance..

    He has a RECORD of being a successful businessman. A "STERLING" businessman..

    THAT'S what we need in the White House.

    Not an empty suit with NO real accomplishments to his record, save ending DADT...

    Michale

  88. [88] 
    Michale wrote:

    I am operating under the fact that Obama has not given massive tax breaks to wealthy people.

    Neither has Romney..

    But Obama DID continue to the Bush Tax Cuts, no???

    Yet, the middle class has taken hit after hit after hit during the Obama years.

    Like what?

    Median family income is down....

    Gas prices have more than doubled...

    Need I go on???

    We've almost recovered from the damage this philosophy inflicted the first time, if we return to this philosophy, like I said, we deserve to be robbed.

    You, like Obama, have a REALLY weird definition of "recovery"....

    Michale.....

  89. [89] 
    Michale wrote:

    "If I can't fix economy in four years I don't deserve a second term."
    -President Barack Obama

    Obama sees the facts..

    Why can't ya'all???

    Michale.....

  90. [90] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Michale,

    Are we going to bet on the outcome of the election?

  91. [91] 
    Michale wrote:

    Are we going to bet on the outcome of the election?

    You betcha! :D

    But I want to pose a question.

    If Obama does as obviously bad in the next debate as he did in the first debate, can we agree that he will lose the election?

    Michale.....

  92. [92] 
    Michale wrote:

    If Obama does as obviously bad in the next debate as he did in the first debate, can we agree that he will lose the election?

    It's kinda an unfair question, I know. Like Obama, everyone here seems petrified of Red Lines...

    My guess is he (and ya'all) are scared to death that the Red Line will actually be crossed. :D

    As to the debate itself, here's my prediction.

    Obama is going to be overly aggressive by way of compensation for his crappy performance in the last debate..

    Romney will likely be calm and rational by comparison and let Obama play out the part of the angry man...

    Of course, Democrats will eat up Obama's performance with a "Yea!!! STICK it to the Republicans!!!" attitude, but Independents and NPAs will be further alienated as they were with Biden's boorish and rude debate performance...

    Independents and NPAs don't want an angry man in control of the nuclear launch codes..

    Obama doesn't seem to realize that the time to cater to the base has passed...

    This mis-read of the electorate will cost him the election.

    You heard it here first.. :D

    Michale.....

  93. [93] 
    akadjian wrote:

    Which policies were those?

    De-regulation, supply side economics, and expensive unfunded wars.

    Obama has de-regulated 20 times more than Bush.

    Now, you're just making up statistics and saying them loudly. Bush de-regulated 25 times more than Obama!!!!

    No, because Romney's plans are only vapor-ware.

    Well, you got that right. But there's one specific ... a 20% tax cut to everyone.

    What I can tell you is that in order to do this, he's going to need to raise money from somewhere or add to the deficit. Which loopholes do you think he'll close? I do give him credit, it's one of the sneakier ways of giving a tax cut to the rich I've seen. Cut everyone's taxes and close the exemptions for the middle class and poor.

    If something sounds too good to be true, it probably is.

    That's all. I return you to your anti-Obama ranting

    -David

  94. [94] 
    akadjian wrote:

    If Obama does as obviously bad in the next debate as he did in the first debate, can we agree that he will lose the election?

    The debate is a false blind. The real danger is the enormous amount of negative ad spending which corporate groups are launching against Obama during the last month.

    -David

  95. [95] 
    Michale wrote:

    Well, you got that right. But there's one specific ... a 20% tax cut to everyone.

    Yea... And Obama *SAID* he would end partisanship in Washington..

    Did he do that??

    No...

    So, why do you hold Romney accountable for what he SAYS he will do when you don't hold Obama accountable for what he SAID he would do???

    Put it this way, David..

    You hire Obama Construction Inc to build you a backyard patio...

    He builds a crappy patio that cost 10 times more than he quoted and has some serious flaws..

    Now you want to have a garage built...

    WHY ON EARTH would you even *CONSIDER* hiring Obama Construction Inc to do the job????

    It defies logic!

    Michale.....

  96. [96] 
    Michale wrote:

    WHY ON EARTH would you even *CONSIDER* hiring Obama Construction Inc to do the job????

    The *only* logical reason for you to even CONSIDER hiring Obama Inc for the job is because, well..

    He's your sister's husband's cousin and, even though you really don't approve of the job he's done before well...

    He's {Democrat} family.

    And you can't piss off the family...

    Does that about sum things up???

    Michale.....

  97. [97] 
    Michale wrote:

    Don't get me wrong..

    I admire your allegiance to... er... well... "family"...

    It's heartening and uplifting to see such devotion...

    Especially in the face of such blatant and ongoing incompetence

    I admire that.... Sorta.... :D

    Michale....

  98. [98] 
    akadjian wrote:

    Rant on, Michale! Rant on!

  99. [99] 
    Michale wrote:

    Rant on, Michale! Rant on!

    It's only a "rant" when no one can deny it.. :D

    Michale....

Comments for this article are closed.
[Powered by WordPress]