The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.

The [2012 Presidential Election] Thread Needs Moar Panic, Less Stacey...Dash? Who the...?

13567100

Posts

  • GlyphGlyph Registered User regular
    Obama was stuttering and rambling off-point the whole time.

    You know you're in trouble when even the BBC accuses you of being too professorial during a debate.

    Colorado is a tossup again and NC already went solidly back to Romney.

    Romney just reset the electorate.

  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited October 2012
    Hee. You're a treasure.

    I suppose for actual content I should say three things:

    1) Favorable numbers didn't move in the snap polls (coincidentally, CNN's was a pretty Romney friendly sample, with a +11 rating for Romney and a -1 for Obama coming in... that is not reflected in the nation at large). I suspect this will become slightly more obvious when all the lying gets hit on over the next few days.
    2) North Carolina has been within two points for like 13 months. Events have not changed it. It's a contest of if the Obama campaign can turn out black/Research Triangle votes vs. the Romney campaign turning out evangelicals.
    3) Ohio. Big lead there and the map is prohibitive without it.

    enlightenedbum on
    The idea that your vote is a moral statement about you or who you vote for is some backwards ass libertarian nonsense. Your vote is about society. Vote to protect the vulnerable.
  • MortiousMortious The Nightmare Begins Move to New ZealandRegistered User regular
    So after that weird debate thing involving the top 3%(?) of small business owners (which I don't think count as small business owners) it made me think;

    Does Mitt actually think of himself as a small business owner? Does he consider Bain to be a small Mom&Pop style business?

    Move to New Zealand
    It’s not a very important country most of the time
    http://steamcommunity.com/id/mortious
  • KingofMadCowsKingofMadCows Registered User regular
    I can't believe Romney actually brought up cutting funding to PBS. Obama should have seized upon that and made a point about how all the stuff Romney wants to cut are too insignificant to make a difference.

  • SubhumanSubhuman Overlord BaltimoreRegistered User regular
    Obama seemed a little unsure of himself. Not like him.

    "Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence"- Napoleon Bonaparte
  • TaramoorTaramoor Storyteller Registered User regular
    Subhuman wrote: »
    Obama seemed a little unsure of himself. Not like him.

    I still think he was shaken up by Romney just outright denying all the things he's said in the past.

    How do you debate someone who has no stance?

  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    John Cole at Balloon Juice called it a post-truth debate. I think that's about right.

    The idea that your vote is a moral statement about you or who you vote for is some backwards ass libertarian nonsense. Your vote is about society. Vote to protect the vulnerable.
  • This content has been removed.

  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    There's also the possibility that his mind was elsewhere... like how a NATO ally might have gotten themselves involved in the clusterfuck that is Syria.

    The idea that your vote is a moral statement about you or who you vote for is some backwards ass libertarian nonsense. Your vote is about society. Vote to protect the vulnerable.
  • Kipling217Kipling217 Registered User regular
    I caught the beginning of the debate and some of the middle(I am in Europe and I need to sleep so I couldn't watch the whole thing).

    The only part that stuck with me was when Obama called out to Michelle about their wedding anniversary. Romney's response about how romantic it was that he took her to a debate, was a good joke(not great, but good). Romney said it in a manner that was not mean spirited and got a laugh out of the audience(who moments before had been told to be quiet). It neutralized the Obama calling out to Michelle and generated some perception that Romney was a man with regular humor. Since it was in the beginning of the debate(first two minutes in fact) it set the tone.

    Thing is, that shout out from Obama was fairly predictable. Their wedding anniversary is public knowledge and if Obama hadn't mentioned it, Romney could have gotten some surrogates to mention it in passing after the debate(making the president seem wonkish after the fact).

    That zinger was probably pre-scripted and pre-acted by Romney. It makes me wonder how long he spent training on how to tell that one joke. It paid of in any case.

    The sky was full of stars, every star an exploding ship. One of ours.
  • SubhumanSubhuman Overlord BaltimoreRegistered User regular
    Taramoor wrote: »
    Subhuman wrote: »
    Obama seemed a little unsure of himself. Not like him.

    I still think he was shaken up by Romney just outright denying all the things he's said in the past.

    How do you debate someone who has no stance?

    I keep hearing this point about Romney "getting his act together" repeated ad infinitum. What act? Has he finally stumbled upon the real Romney? This kind of soul searching may be okay for some kid on psychoactive drugs who is questioning reality and hasn't made his mind up yet, but Romney is running for the presidency of the United States of America-- He should know what he believes and what his stances are by now.

    "Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence"- Napoleon Bonaparte
  • archivistkitsunearchivistkitsune Registered User regular
    Yeah, Assad might have just laid the final bit of work for the next war. Shelling a Turkey town across the border and killing one woman, her three kids and one of her friends, who was also a woman, is not going to go over well. I'm curious if Turkey's counter attack actually hit the Syrians that launched the shells, if it killed any of them and how many. I expect to see more on this and I don't think it's going to help Romney given the rally around the flag effect it could cause and the GOP is probably going to regret banging on the war drum so much given Assad is a major ally of both Iran and Hezbollah.

    Anyways, some initial impressions from some of the media. To summarize:
    -This was a stronger debate performance for Romney, which I don't think anyone is going to dispute. The nineteen primary debates weren't a complete waste for Romney after all.
    -Body language has value. Without the sound on Romney seemed more enthusiastic instead of coming across as robot. Obama seemed reserved.
    -Obama was probably holding back so people couldn't criticize him of not being presidential.
    -Obama's smile actually helped him and blunted some the damage caused by seeming so reserved. Romney didn't smile enough and when he did it seemed too much like a scowl.
    -There were lots of specifics to look through, granted most of Romney's were bullshit.
    -This debate isn't game changing. Neither candidate scored a knockout, nor did either one fuck up horribly.

    -Big Bird, Romney wasn't wise to suggest putting him down.
    tumblr_mbcorsok1L1qcfoo3o1_500.gif

  • SubhumanSubhuman Overlord BaltimoreRegistered User regular
    Subhuman wrote: »
    Obama seemed a little unsure of himself. Not like him.

    It did seem like there was a lot of economic bullshit which should've been pinned to Romney harder as he brought it up. Maybe Obama's not been drilling himself on the numbers or, is being advised to not to mention them or something.

    Because a declaration like "the top 3% of small businesses employ half of all people employed in small business in America" is a staggering oxymoron, especially when it was followed up with "an electronics owner with 4 employees..."

    On the other hand, I can just imagine focus group polling says the electorate doesn't like people who seem "clever".

    mmm, not sure what point you're trying to make.

    "Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence"- Napoleon Bonaparte
  • SubhumanSubhuman Overlord BaltimoreRegistered User regular
    Mill wrote: »
    Yeah, Assad might have just laid the final bit of work for the next war. Shelling a Turkey town across the border and killing one woman, her three kids and one of her friends, who was also a woman, is not going to go over well. I'm curious if Turkey's counter attack actually hit the Syrians that launched the shells, if it killed any of them and how many. I expect to see more on this and I don't think it's going to help Romney given the rally around the flag effect it could cause and the GOP is probably going to regret banging on the war drum so much given Assad is a major ally of both Iran and Hezbollah.

    Anyways, some initial impressions from some of the media. To summarize:
    -This was a stronger debate performance for Romney, which I don't think anyone is going to dispute. The nineteen primary debates weren't a complete waste for Romney after all.
    -Body language has value. Without the sound on Romney seemed more enthusiastic instead of coming across as robot. Obama seemed reserved.
    -Obama was probably holding back so people couldn't criticize him of not being presidential.
    -Obama's smile actually helped him and blunted some the damage caused by seeming so reserved. Romney didn't smile enough and when he did it seemed too much like a scowl.
    -There were lots of specifics to look through, granted most of Romney's were bullshit.
    -This debate isn't game changing. Neither candidate scored a knockout, nor did either one fuck up horribly.

    -Big Bird, Romney wasn't wise to suggest putting him down.
    tumblr_mbcorsok1L1qcfoo3o1_500.gif

    I'd like to think that a 90 minute debate would be rather useless in changing someone's overall opinion of somebody (unless they said or did something really fucked up).

    "Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence"- Napoleon Bonaparte
  • AbsalonAbsalon Lands of Always WinterRegistered User regular
    You never allow a republican to talk at length unhindered unless you have a choice. Romney knows the last available voters never look beyond the superficial and that the media wants him to rebound. Plus, performance like this can't help with turnout.

    If the Friday jobs report is bad, this will be a dangerous affair. Obama has enough firewalls, but not a very good share of voters. How many viewed this mess?

  • TaramoorTaramoor Storyteller Registered User regular
    I'll be supremely disappointed if Romney's untimely reference to Big Bird is what kills him and not the fact that everything he said was devoid of truth or substance.

  • archivistkitsunearchivistkitsune Registered User regular
    I think a silver lining we can all take from this, both conservative and liberal, is that society hasn't quite gotten to the point where a 90 minute debate, with no fucks, can easily sway people.

  • AbsalonAbsalon Lands of Always WinterRegistered User regular
    Mill wrote: »
    Mill wrote: »
    I think a silver lining we can all take from this, both conservative and liberal, is that society hasn't quite gotten to the point where a 90 minute debate, with no fucks, can easily sway people.
    Sure, but the less pessimistic among us should admit that post-debate polling will be the best barometer available. The doomsayers should admit it as well.

  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    Absalon wrote: »
    You never allow a republican to talk at length unhindered unless you have a choice. Romney knows the last available voters never look beyond the superficial and that the media wants him to rebound. Plus, performance like this can't help with turnout.

    If the Friday jobs report is bad, this will be a dangerous affair. Obama has enough firewalls, but not a very good share of voters. How many viewed this mess?

    It's usually a lot. Based on Twitter more than the convention speeches.

    Estimate for Friday is like 160k private. Expectations is like 110k

    The idea that your vote is a moral statement about you or who you vote for is some backwards ass libertarian nonsense. Your vote is about society. Vote to protect the vulnerable.
  • SubhumanSubhuman Overlord BaltimoreRegistered User regular
    Worst moderator... ever

    "Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence"- Napoleon Bonaparte
  • archivistkitsunearchivistkitsune Registered User regular
    Absalon wrote: »
    You never allow a republican to talk at length unhindered unless you have a choice. Romney knows the last available voters never look beyond the superficial and that the media wants him to rebound. Plus, performance like this can't help with turnout.

    If the Friday jobs report is bad, this will be a dangerous affair. Obama has enough firewalls, but not a very good share of voters. How many viewed this mess?

    -Depends on the republican and what they are talking about. Some of them, like Cantor, actually don't want to talk for a lengthy bit of time because they tend to hang themselves.

    -We're going into the holiday hiring season, I'd expect the numbers to go up in every case but a recession.

  • HonkHonk Honk is this poster. Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    I just woke up to the wrong fucking headlines.

    PSN: Honkalot
  • Gnome-InterruptusGnome-Interruptus Registered User regular
    So It Goes wrote: »
    Taramoor wrote: »
    Romney's biggest risk now is that he's sort of locked in his policy points on a truly national stage.

    He has (kind of) stated to everybody watching the debate what he plans to do. If he starts walking it back again, or changes his position next debate, or his positions don't align with Paul Ryan, it could hurt.

    he has been changing positions on a daily basis, then walking back, then saying something, then campaign releases a statement...

    I don't see anything changing.
    So what you are saying is that the only thing that stays the same is that change is constant. :P

    steam_sig.png
    MWO: Adamski
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    Absalon wrote: »
    You never allow a republican to talk at length unhindered unless you have a choice. Romney knows the last available voters never look beyond the superficial and that the media wants him to rebound. Plus, performance like this can't help with turnout.

    If the Friday jobs report is bad, this will be a dangerous affair. Obama has enough firewalls, but not a very good share of voters. How many viewed this mess?

    It's not gonna change the fundamental math here. Some GOPers will get energized for a bit on the high of the media telling them their horse one this heat, but that's about it.

    And likely that will fade because I don't expect Romney to pull any sort of victory out of the next 2. Certainly not the foreign policy one.

  • TaramoorTaramoor Storyteller Registered User regular
    Romney will only fail at the foreign policy debate if he actually talks about foreign policy.

    If he does what he did here and hijacks the proceedings. Say, if he ignores the time limit and talks about the Olympics for 90 minutes, he could make a strong showing.

  • RMS OceanicRMS Oceanic Registered User regular
    Optimism ahoy, I think Obama was employing a "turn the other cheek" strategy. Note how we are not talking about any gaffes he committed, he let Romney set the agenda, and this has advantages (flip flop overdrive, "kill PBS") and disadvantages (Romney's "energetic" performance). I'll be concerned if the other two debates are like this, but right now I'll wait for a more long term opinion.

    I may be biased, but Romney seemed arrogant and disrespectful to both Obama and the moderator. Rather Nixonesque (against JFK that is).

  • archivistkitsunearchivistkitsune Registered User regular
    As I said in the previous thread, even if Romney won, he'd just be limping to the next debate. So people need to stop with the doom and gloom. This isn't a game changing debate, in fact, it only really covered taxes and healthcare, so it kind of did nothing to help Romney with the groups that he isn't polling well with. Given that Romney wasn't doing poorly with Women, Hispanics, Blacks, 18-29 year-olds despite have some mystifying edge over Obama on the economy, for months should tell anyone that people do care about more than just the economy.

    I'm already seeing fact checks out that point out he was wrong on his healthcare claims (some of which had been debunked before), wrong with his claim that no one called out his tax plan and how more than half the green energy businesses that benefited from stimulus are still in business contrary to what Romney said. We'll see what else that came out of Romney's mouth tonight gets debunked. Romney probably over-extended himself, some of what he did to come out stronger tonight, possibly ahead (I don't think he won) is going to come back and bite him in the ass.

    Now does anyone remember how much cash Romney has on hand because it looks like he might be going into the red soon, much to the misfortune of those in swing states. I'm sure he'll get a slight boost in fundraising after tonight from the donors he hasn't tapped out, but I doubt he has enough money to live up to his promise of matching his April ad buys. He still has spend money on things that aren't TV ads.

    In other foreign matters that may have an impact on the election. Those sanctions that the republicans and Isarelis's PM claimed weren't working, well they seem to be working and we might see a push for regime change in Iran. If this becomes more newsworthy, I expect that's going to help Obama with some voters.

  • AbsalonAbsalon Lands of Always WinterRegistered User regular
    Again, poll numbers are the only things that matter. The media may decide Romney is on a roaring comeback trajectory, and their word is law.

  • RMS OceanicRMS Oceanic Registered User regular
    Absalon wrote: »
    Again, poll numbers are the only things that matter. The media may decide Romney is on a roaring comeback trajectory, and their word is law.

    Methinks you put too much weight on the media's interpretation of the debate. There are roughly 792 hours until the election, so I think it's unlikely focusing on just six of those will affect the outcome.

  • OremLKOremLK Registered User regular
    Obama is trying to run down the clock while up a touchdown early in the fourth quarter. I don't like that strategy in football, and I don't like it in politics. I would like to have seen him be a little more aggressive in calling out Romney's lies, and a little smoother in making his points.

    That said, if the media actually does their job this should wind up being seen as a loss for Romney as his lies are uncovered over the next few days. Whether the media will do so is another question entirely--Romney campaign is clearly banking on them not.

    My zombie survival life simulator They Don't Sleep is out now on Steam if you want to check it out.
  • Harry DresdenHarry Dresden Registered User regular
    Taramoor wrote: »
    Subhuman wrote: »
    Obama seemed a little unsure of himself. Not like him.

    I still think he was shaken up by Romney just outright denying all the things he's said in the past.

    How do you debate someone who has no stance?

    This shouldn't have been that big a surprise for Obama. Changing opinions at any time to win is Romney's M.O.

  • Harry DresdenHarry Dresden Registered User regular
    edited October 2012
    Subhuman wrote: »
    Worst moderator... ever

    Maybe not. Candy Crowley's the moderator for the next debate. :?

    Harry Dresden on
  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    I thought the conventional wisdom was that debates don't matter unless there is some huge fuckup?

  • OremLKOremLK Registered User regular
    Couscous wrote: »
    I thought the conventional wisdom was that debates don't matter unless there is some huge fuckup?

    They can matter as much as three percentage points in the polls IIRC. Whether that's due to a huge fuckup or just a really big win by one of the candidates I don't know if matters.

    My zombie survival life simulator They Don't Sleep is out now on Steam if you want to check it out.
  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/10/top-romney-adviser-states-will-have-to-cover-people-with-pre-existing-conditions-under-president-rom.php
    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.


    “With respect to pre-existing conditions, what Governor Romney has said is for those with continuous coverage, he would continue to make sure that they receive their coverage,” said Eric Fehrnstrom, referring to existing laws which require insurance companies to sell coverage to people who already have insurance, or within 90 days of losing their employer coverage.

    Pressed by TPM’s Evan McMorris-Santoro, Fehrnstrom said those who currently lack coverage because they have pre-existing conditions would need their states to implement their own laws — like Romney’s own Massachusetts health care law — that ban insurance company from discriminating against sick people.

    “We’d like to see states do what Massachusetts did,” Fehrnstrom said. “In Massachusetts we have a ban on pre-existing conditions.”

    Romney’s plan, of course, became the model for Obamacare — a fact Obama happily reminded Romney and debate watchers Wednesday night.
    So lying sack?

  • DevoutlyApatheticDevoutlyApathetic Registered User regular
    OremLK wrote: »
    Couscous wrote: »
    I thought the conventional wisdom was that debates don't matter unless there is some huge fuckup?

    They can matter as much as three percentage points in the polls IIRC. Whether that's due to a huge fuckup or just a really big win by one of the candidates I don't know if matters.

    I think the issue is what they do to the narrative more than what they convince people of. Previous to this debate we had "Mitt Romney is terrible!" and now we have "Mitt Romney, keen debater!" which I'm hoping turns into "Mitt Romney, lyingest liar who ever lied a lie."

    Nod. Get treat. PSN: Quippish
  • TomantaTomanta Registered User regular
    Not hearing enough fact-checking and etch-a-sketch comments from Obama's camp this morning. I also think they need to hit Romney hard on his style of leadership: "Eh, I'll just give Congress some vague ideas and let them hash it out."

  • GaardeanGaardean Registered User regular
    OremLK wrote: »
    Obama is trying to run down the clock while up a touchdown early in the fourth quarter. I don't like that strategy in football, and I don't like it in politics. I would like to have seen him be a little more aggressive in calling out Romney's lies, and a little smoother in making his points.

    That said, if the media actually does their job this should wind up being seen as a loss for Romney as his lies are uncovered over the next few days. Whether the media will do so is another question entirely--Romney campaign is clearly banking on them not.

    Problem with this analogy is that it doesn't matter who wins the game, it's all about how excited the crowd in the final seconds. Even if Obama goes for a big scoring play, and doesn't fumble, then everyone decides the game is over and heads for the parking lot. Romney scoring drives up turnout for both sides, so it's very questionable whether that's a "win" for him or not.

    steam_sig.png
  • AbsalonAbsalon Lands of Always WinterRegistered User regular
    Tomanta wrote: »
    Tomanta wrote: »
    Not hearing enough fact-checking and etch-a-sketch comments from Obama's camp this morning. I also think they need to hit Romney hard on his style of leadership: "Eh, I'll just give Congress some vague ideas and let them hash it out."

    Can't that be countered by pointing at Obama leaving healthcare reform to congress?

Sign In or Register to comment.