Support NeoGAF

[Measley]

This is more or less an admission that Obama just wasn't prepared for Romney to lie about literally everything and assumed there would at some point be consequences for such behavior. Which would probably be nice!

I think the most messed up thing about this is that the Romney team has nothing to hit back with.

Rope-a-dope indeed.

 

[ErasureAcer]

Its in the link

I still don't see it. I must be blind. So it's playing in all the lean Obama states...good.

 

[NullPointer]

Obama Ad Attacks Romney’s Debate Performance: ‘How Could We Ever Trust Him?’
http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/obama-ad-attacks-romneys-debate-performance-how-could

Damn that was quick

Now make a few more of those and we might have something. And for every failure of arithmetic they should include Romney's debate line about needing a different accountant.

But nothing will make up for the fact that Obama should have done a better job calling Romney out.

 

[Snake]

Obama didn't "plan" to lose the debate, no matter how you cut it.

It is clear that the strategy was to play it safe and not get dragged down in a bloody match with Romney. This certainly hurt Obama with the media, and didn't gain Obama anything with voters in the short term.

But today, the campaigns feel the same as they did the day before the debate. Obama un-fazed and campaigning hard, and Romney unable to break through with actual messages despite a strong showing last night. Really, nobody in the media is taking his positions from last night seriously. And why would they?

Any job report predictions for tomorrow?

45,000 jobs added. Unemployment ticks up.

 

[Drek]

I'm still curious if Romney camp is ready to lose Florida at this point - despite totally going 180 on all of his plans in the campaign, he doubled down on the medicare voucher plan by indirectly stating that it's bad for the under 55.

That was really striking and probably one of the few things that anyone watching will be able to differentiate.

They can't. Ohio is already out of reach and with Ohio and Florida Obama wins without a single other state, including NH or Iowa.

Romney just can't get off the voucher message because the ultimate goal is to end medicare and social security without giving that money back to the middle class. It'd be like Obama not pushing pre-existing conditions coverage. It is intrinsically part of his political beliefs.

 

[el retorno]

This is what we all said last night. It's like Ryan post-RNC convention speech. He'll look okay in the short-run, but he opened himself up to a lot of long-term damage. I'm just glad the Obama campaign isn't wasting anytime getting that message out there and isn't relying on the media to do that fact-check work (that they should be doing).

No doubt. When people whine about the media they forget that the media doesn't operate in a vacuum. if Obama spends this week attackinh romney for lying the news corps are gonna have to look into that and the facts are on Obama's side there.

 

[pigeon]

Jon Chait says that I'm right about everything:

Romney won the debate in no small part because he adopted a policy of simply lying about his policies. Probably the best way to understand Obama’s listless performance is that he was prepared to debate the claims Romney has been making for the entire campaign, and Romney switched up and started making different and utterly bogus ones. Obama, perhaps, was not prepared for that, and he certainly didn’t think quickly enough on his feet to adjust to it.

http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2012/10/romneys-successful-debate-plan-lying.html

Just for fun this is my prediction of the electoral map this November 6th.

http://www.270towin.com/2012_election_predictions.php?mapid=Egm

Seems pretty plausible. I'm a little curious as to why you think Obama will lose Nevada while winning Arizona!

 

[Officerrob]

Continuing with my Big Bird love today, it seems Scott Baio got trolled by a Big Bird parody account:

Yo Mitt Romney, Sesame Street is brought to you today by the letters F & U! #debates #SupportBigBird

THIS is why we watch sponge bob & other @NickelodeonPR @nickatnitetv shows. Stop the Hate when you don't agree.Teach all kids love @BlGBlRD

 

[RustyNails]

I wonder if there was a reluctance for Obama to be aggressive since that would then raise the 'angry black man' issue. If so, he needs to drop that and get aggressive.

Or just hire an Anger translator

 

[empty vessel]

All the crying going on in far left circles is missing the fact that Obama actually won the election last night, during the debate.

I have to take some issue with describing Democrats and people who support Obama as the "far left."

 

[Thequietone]

Jon Chait says that I'm right about everything:



http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2012/10/romneys-successful-debate-plan-lying.html



Seems pretty plausible. I'm a little curious as to why you think Obama will lose Nevada while winning Arizona!

Hmm, I could sworn I read somewhere last night Obama lost Nevada in 2008. I'd change that to blue then.

 

[Drek]

This is more or less an admission that Obama just wasn't prepared for Romney to lie about literally everything and assumed there would at some point be consequences for such behavior. Which would probably be nice!

Obama had nothing to prepare for. How do you prepare for a total unknown who will lie and shift positions on a whim?

You can't. Obama showed up, played it safe, kept distance and let Romney vent and fume. Romney didn't self immolate like many on the far left where hoping, but then Romney isn't Sarah Palin.

What he did do was give fantastic advertising fodder for Florida and allowed Obama to continue his "no substance" attacks uncontested.

People bitch about Obama not hitting back on a few of Mitt's points, but that ignores Mitt's inability during the entire debate to give meaningful response to Obama's accusations of vague, non-committal policies. More than anything else Americans want to hear real talk about what you'll do as POTUS in debates. Romney won stylistically and controlled the direction of the debates, but Obama's narrative of Romney remains completely unchanged, undamaged, and as of yet still uncontested.

 

[Officerrob]

From Google:

 

[Drek]

I have to take some issue with describing Democrats and people who support Obama as the "far left."

I support Obama quite heavily in fact.

But the people who act like Obama was going to end this election forever in a single debate are those so far to the left of the political argument that they fail to see the true nature of this election.

45% of the U.S. or more will vote for Mitt Romney simply because the GOP is putting him on a pedestal. Obama can't knock that pedestal over. 99% of the bitching about Obama hinges on the fact that he should have been able to do just that.

Its "why didn't he close Gitmo, get us out of Afghanistan, legalize pot, and give me free college!" types who aren't paying attention to the realities of this election.

Obama did exactly what he needed to do and Romney gave the Obama campaign just what they needed going forward. People unwilling to see that are the same people worried six months ago when the national polling was tight and I explained to them then how it's all about the swing states. They've obviously forgotten that lesson far too quickly.

 

[pigeon]

Obama had nothing to prepare for. How do you prepare for a total unknown who will lie and shift positions on a whim?

Practice? Obama came prepared with policies and facts. That's fine and all, but if he had known what Romney was going to do in advance, do you really think he'd have done the exact same thing? I doubt that very much.

I think he could've been more prepared to cite outside sources and to press the audience to go to fact-checkers. I think he could've been ready to press his opponent on specific points, rather than, as he did, trying to lay out a comprehensive picture of his policies, which just gives Romney more time to talk. I think he could've had a whole "more in sorrow than in anger" speech to give about lying!

I could be wrong about all this -- I'm not a debate coach. But Axelrod more or less comes right out and says that Obama will do things differently next time. That implies he's not happy with how he did things this time.

Again, I don't think Romney's strategy is a good one in the long term, which Axelrod also says -- as noted, Romney's left himself open to a variety of nasty ads. But it accomplished what Romney needed to accomplish -- at whatever cost -- last night, and it would've been nice to prevent that from happening, because then we could all relax and talk about coal policy.

 

[speculawyer]

I have to take some issue with describing Democrats and people who support Obama as the "far left."

Yeah, I agree. I support Obama because he is NOT 'far left'.

 

[Owzers]

Jon Chait says that I'm right about everything:



http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2012/10/romneys-successful-debate-plan-lying.html

Yep, that was my prediction. The only way i saw Romney not being able to lie his way out of everything was the moderator to take control when necessary and Leiher was completely stepped on. Obama wasn't going to be able to do it on the spot, it's a he said mitt said deal. No, that's not my plan, i have no idea what you're talking about. The ads will be effective though.

 

[Tim-E]

I have to take some issue with describing Democrats and people who support Obama as the "far left."

Posers, right?

 

[pigeon]

Yep, that was my prediction. The only way i saw Romney not being able to lie his way out of everything was the moderator to take control when necessary and Leiher was completely stepped on. Obama wasn't going to be able to do it on the spot, it's a he said mitt said deal. No, that's not my plan, i have no idea what you're talking about. The ads will be effective though.

So I have to ask -- were people expecting the moderator to point out when Romney was lying? I mean, that would certainly be nice, but is that a thing that actually happens in debates? I definitely did not expect to see that.

But the people who act like Obama was going to end this election forever in a single debate are those so far to the left of the political argument that they fail to see the true nature of this election.

45% of the U.S. or more will vote for Mitt Romney simply because the GOP is putting him on a pedestal. Obama can't knock that pedestal over. 99% of the bitching about Obama hinges on the fact that he should have been able to do just that.

You're missing the point, though. Romney had a lot riding on this debate because he's pretty much already lost otherwise. If he couldn't put a solid showing in, it's not even a question of polls -- the money would dry up. 45% isn't 51%, and everybody knows it, so why bother paying for him? There was a lot of discussion over Romney's money problems the last couple of weeks, so it would've been nice to see him choke, because then we could be confident that even the elite Republicans (not the Tea Party) would've written him off.

 

[RustyNails]

Best article on the debate:

Mitt Romney is right about Big Bird

Frankly, I have always had problems with Big Bird. I don’t know what he is. He is six years old, according to the show’s count, but I have suspicions that he is in fact a fully grown man in a bird suit.

He is eight feet and two inches tall, according to the Muppet Wiki, and he keeps flip-flopping on the subject of his species. One minute he’s a lark. The next he’s part canary. The next he’s a Bigus Canarius. He needs to get his story straight. One of his catch-phrases is “Asking questions is a good way to find things out!” But no one is asking this bird the right questions.

At best, he’s a six year-old flightless bird who lives alone, even though he thinks the entire alphabet is one word. At worst, he’s a dinosaur. (The more we learn about them, the more they sound like Big Bird. I just think it’s a possibility we should consider.)

Maybe Mitt knows something about Big Bird that we don’t, like that he is responsible for the massive growth in entitlement spending, or that if we just fired him he would be able to turn the manufacturing sector around. Maybe that’s why he wants him gone — even though Sesame Street notes they receive little funding from PBS.

I am not a muppet hater. But I would be curious if Big Bird is capable of supporting himself without government aid. He sounds like a 47 percenter to me — have you ever seen him pay taxes? Just because you are six years old and a bird does not mean I should have to pay for entitlements like food. Who is paying for the lavish nest that he shares with his teddy bear, Radar? Where are the adults in his life?

When is he going to get a job? He can’t still be six years old. That is not how time works. I am no longer six, and Big Bird was six before I was.

Actually, that is the main trouble with Sesame Street now. I am no longer six, and now I realize that the Count has severe OCD and maybe should get help. I am no longer six, and the Cookie Monster needs to get his eating under control. I am no longer six, and when I hear the name “Grover” I assume someone wants me to sign a tax pledge. Before, it was a gaggle of lovable singing monsters who wanted to sing me the alphabet, and now I am supposed to have political feelings about it. There are petitions for Bert and Ernie to get married. Never mind that muppets do not exist below the waist. We are no longer six, and when you’ve lived together for decades and tend plants together, we stop assuming you are roommates.

But even Mitt Romney knows you cannot hate Big Bird. That would be like not loving Big Brother. You have to pledge lip service to the giant avian before you strap him to your car and drive away. And good riddance, say I. Sharing? Being true to yourself? Growing familiar with letters? All well and good. But they’ve been on the air for decades. Now they just sing inane duets with Will.I.Am, make True Blood parodies, and cover Carly Rae Jepsen.

You can’t be six forever. End the bird.

:lol

 

[Arrowgigantic]

But nothing will make up for the fact that Obama should have done a better job calling Romney out.

Well, he did call that out, at least twice.

People were just kind of astonished that Mitt wasn't roofing the dog last night, that's all. I doubt Obama had much concern about letting Romney put a lot of sparkle on that all destination, no journey piece of Swiss cheese he calls a platform. Shutting him down hard would have shaken some confidence out of Romney and maybe put him back into "Obama's bad" mode instead of the "Here are my awesome shits I call ideas" mode he stayed in instead.

 

[Stinkles]

So I have to ask -- were people expecting the moderator to point out when Romney was lying? I mean, that would certainly be nice, but is that a thing that actually happens in debates? I definitely did not expect to see that.

They can't. Even if they knew, they can't actual enter the debate. Not with any real input or effect. However it's pretty sad that the winner of this, or really any modern American political debate didn't actually have to tell the truth at all. May as well get See Threepio to sit there on a wooden throne and tell Ewoks stories with sound effects.

 

[Owzers]

So I have to ask -- were people expecting the moderator to point out when Romney was lying? I mean, that would certainly be nice, but is that a thing that actually happens in debates? I definitely did not expect to see that.

Out of that debate, i expected the moderator to push back on the 5 trillion tax cut plan. Apart from that, not much was said in general, but denying that your plan called for those cuts is a flat out lie and i thought the moderator would say something like " your plan does call for a 20% tax rate decrease that amounts to ~5 trillion" and then throw it back to Mitt to clarify. Maybe i was expecting too much though.

 

[worldrunover]

Romney said the highest tax bracket wont pay less in taxes under his plan.

Question 1: then why change the tax code at all?
A: to lower the middle class burden.

Question 2: IF ITS DEFICIT NEUTRAL SOMEONE HAS TO PAY MORE AHHHHHH!

Its pretty easy to understand he's lying.

 

[Trurl]

Romney has a secret plan to make the tax code drastically more progressive.

 

[Tim-E]

Yeah, I agree. I support Obama because he is NOT 'far left'.

Same here. I spent my first few years of college calling for socialism, but as I've started a family and a career, I've lost my "anti-establishment" feelings quite a bit. Had the Occupy movement happened when I was a sophomore in college I would've been all over it, but not now. I don't see myself ever supporting conservatism whatsoever, but I'll take moderate liberalism that can actually get passed over wishing for far-left policies that would make any candidate unelectable in the US.

 

[zchen]

I don't understand the after 1 debate sky is falling crowd

 

[RustyNails]

2 jobs lost.

Spoiler

Big Bird and Jim Lehrer.

 

[Tim-E]

I don't understand the after 1 debate sky is falling crowd

cartoon soldier and diablos are likely huffing paint at this very moment.

 

[syllogism]

http://www.pbs.org/about/news/archive/2012/statement-presidential-debate/

 

[pigeon]

http://www.pbs.org/about/news/archive/2012/statement-presidential-debate/

Is this a joke about how the PBS website is down because Romney cut it?
edit: oh there it is, pbs BRINGING THE HEAT

 

[NullPointer]

Well, he did call that out, at least twice.

He spoke the words yes. His delivery was pretty awful though so I don't think those words connected.

 

[Snake]

cartoon soldier and diablos are likely huffing paint at this very moment.

Diablos has actually taken it pretty well as far as I've seen.

 

[Suikoguy]

Diablos has actually taken it pretty well as far as I've seen.

Yeah, I've been pretend other posters are Diablos for old times sake.

 

[Trurl]

Same here. I spent my first few years of college calling for socialism, but as I've started a family and a career, I've lost my "anti-establishment" feelings quite a bit. Had the Occupy movement happened when I was a sophomore in college I would've been all over it, but not now. I don't see myself ever supporting conservatism whatsoever, but I'll take moderate liberalism that can actually get passed over wishing for far-left policies that would make any candidate unelectable in the US.

Wishing for far left changes and pragmatically supporting a president who is electable are not mutually exclusive. Compared to the American political system my hopes and beliefs are far left, but I avoid walling myself into the purity-over-results sections of the political world.

I think that Speculawyer typed what he typed because he personally does not identify with the far-left, not just because he is being pragmatic.

 

[Baraka in the White House]

Diablos has actually taken it pretty well as far as I've seen.

I haven't seen a ton of hand wringing from PoliGAF regulars, just more of, "A Wild ConservaGAF Appears!"

 

[Suikoguy]

I haven't seen a ton of hand wringing from PoliGAF regulars, just more of, "A Wild ConservaGAF Appears!"

See Puddles and Cartoon_Solider

 

[Trurl]

Prediction: Biden's performance against Ryan will be awesome. Also, nobody will care.

 

[Dr. Pangloss]

I have to take some issue with describing Democrats and people who support Obama as the "far left."

I think this guy can sum up your thinking EV

He fashioned out of himself a new populist image by baldly asserting at one point that he, Willard Romney, who needs a passport to visit most of his money, is going to break up the big banks and stand up for the embattled middle class. This would have been comical if anyone on the stage had cared to point that out. And Romney came out of it largely unmarked. His lying pack of sons must be very proud.

What you saw, I think, anyway, was the end product of the president's consuming naivete as regards the American political process, as well as the end product of thirty years of a Democratic Party that has slid so far to the center-right that a Democratic president found himself arguing with a "severely conservative" Republican candidate over the issues of how much the Democratic president had cut out of the budget, how many regulations he'd trimmed, how much more devoted to the middle-class-kick-in-the-balls Simpson-Bowles "plan" he is, and how he would "reform" Social Security and Medicare — and, frankly, a Democratic president losing some of those arguments to his left.

Seriously now, how much would you have bet going in that the president would spend as much time as he did on areas in which "Governor Romney and I agree" and not mention the famous 47-percent video at all? Of all of the night's obvious surreality, that has to take the prize.

It has given the Beltway press the horse race of their dreams, which is going to matter a lot over the next couple of weeks. Moreover, it may have buried progressive government forever by demonstrating how tight the boundaries really are around what is considered acceptable economic solutions to a battered national economy. That will remain the case, clearly, even if this president gets re-elected. If that's this president's final legacy, he has only himself to blame.

http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/presidential-debate-obama-2012-13353709

 

[pigeon]

John Sununu just said that Obama's problem is that he's just too lazy to prepare for debates.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archiv...alking+Points+Memo:+by+Joshua+Micah+Marshall)

(backpats to tpm)

 

[Tim-E]

Wishing for far left changes and pragmatically supporting a president who is electable are not mutually exclusive. Compared to the American political system my hopes and beliefs are far left, but I avoid walling myself into the purity-over-results sections of the political world.

Good point. It's important for people to understand the country's electorate, as well as the realities and the constraints of our system. I know a lot of the left follow this "purity-over-results" thinking, but I'd rather have a President who governs like our current one has that is able to win over candidates clamoring for "purity" and losing.

 

[Officerrob]

Biden is campaigning in Nebraska where:

Crowd at #Biden rally chanting "Save Big Bird".

 

[Tim-E]

I hope Big Bird ends up stumping for Obama before the month is over.

 

[Loudninja]

The PBS stuff is weird.

 

[HamPster PamPster]

http://www.pbs.org/about/news/archive/2012/statement-presidential-debate/

"The federal investment in public broadcasting equals about one one-hundredth of one percent of the federal budget."

:lol I can feel the budget balancing already

 

[Bam Bam Baklava]

You guys are crazy, if his approval numbers are this high a debate where he played it safe isn't going to suddenly cause a Romney landslide.

 

[RDreamer]

The PBS stuff is weird.

It's weird, but I think it can be used as a rallying point to demonstrate just how utterly ridiculous Mitt's "plan" is.

 

[TacticalFox88]

Prediction: Biden's performance against Ryan will be awesome. Also, nobody will care.

After expecting Bams to stomp Romney, I'm holding out on saying Biden will toast Ryan. I just don't see it now. :/

 

[Loudninja]

It's weird, but I think it can be used as a rallying point to demonstrate just how utterly ridiculous Mitt's "plan" is.

Yeah that is what I mean, I have no idea why he brought up CBS.

 

[Souldriver]

Weird how Big Bird really did gain traction.


Or are we witnessing a liberal equivalent of all those ridiculous things that gain traction in the conservative blogosphere but are just non-issues for anyone out of the bubble?